Petersfield Neighbourhood Development Plan · 2019-02-07 · September 2015 1 Petersfield...

Petersfield Neighbourhood Development Plan

2013 - 2028

September 2015

(This page is intentionally blank)

September 2015 i Petersfield Neighbourhood Development Plan

1 Introduction 1.1 Why do we need this plan? ...................................................................................................... 1 1.2 What does the plan do? ............................................................................................................ 1 1.3 Who authored this plan? ........................................................................................................... 1 1.4 How was this plan formed? ...................................................................................................... 2 1.5 What area does this plan cover? .............................................................................................. 2 1.6 How to read this plan ................................................................................................................ 3 1.7 Additional copies of this plan .................................................................................................... 4

2 The Vision for Petersfield 2.1 What defines our town? ............................................................................................................ 5 2.2 Key principles ........................................................................................................................... 5

2.2.1 Petersfield must continue to feel ‘compact’ ........................................................................ 5 2.2.2 Petersfield must continue to act as a centre for the surrounding area ................................ 5 2.2.3 Petersfield must retain its markets, festivals and events .................................................... 6 2.2.4 Petersfield must continue to have a close relationship with the surrounding countryside ... 6

2.3 The vision ................................................................................................................................. 6 2.4 Our community ......................................................................................................................... 7 2.5 Our economy ............................................................................................................................ 7 2.6 Our homes ............................................................................................................................... 7 2.7 Our ability to move around the town ......................................................................................... 8 2.8 Our town’s relationship with the environment ........................................................................... 8

3 Housing 3.1 Housing in Petersfield............................................................................................................... 9 3.2 Community feedback about housing ......................................................................................... 9 3.3 Freedoms and constraints on new residential development ................................................... 10 3.4 Ensuring the viability of new development .............................................................................. 10 3.5 Housing objectives and policies .............................................................................................. 11

3.5.1 Housing Objective 1 (HO1) .............................................................................................. 12 3.5.2 Housing Objective 2 (HO2) .............................................................................................. 16 3.5.3 Housing Objective 3 (HO3) .............................................................................................. 20

4 The Built Environment 4.1 Background ............................................................................................................................ 22 4.2 Setting and special character ................................................................................................. 22 4.3 Community feedback .............................................................................................................. 23 4.4 Built Environment objectives and policies ............................................................................... 24

4.4.1 Built Environment Objective 1 (BEO1) ............................................................................. 25 4.4.2 Built Environment Objective 2 (BEO2) ............................................................................. 32

5 Getting Around 5.1 Background ............................................................................................................................ 33 5.2 Community feedback .............................................................................................................. 34 5.3 Getting Around objectives and policies ................................................................................... 35

5.3.1 Getting Around Objective 1 (GAO1) ................................................................................. 36 5.3.2 Getting Around Objective 2 (GAO2) ................................................................................. 37 5.3.3 Getting Around Objective 3 (GAO3) ................................................................................. 37 5.3.4 Getting Around Objective 4 (GAO4) ................................................................................. 39

6 Community 6.1 Background ............................................................................................................................ 40 6.2 Community feedback .............................................................................................................. 40 6.3 Community objectives and policies ......................................................................................... 41

6.3.1 Community Objective 1 (CO1) ......................................................................................... 42

Contents, Tables and Figures

September 2015 ii Petersfield Neighbourhood Development Plan

6.3.1 Community Objective 2 (CO2) ......................................................................................... 44 6.3.1 Community Objective 3 (CO3) ......................................................................................... 45

7 The Natural Environment 7.1 Background ............................................................................................................................ 47 7.2 Community feedback .............................................................................................................. 47 7.3 Natural Environment objectives and policies .......................................................................... 48

7.3.1 Natural Environment Objective 1 (NEO1) ........................................................................ 49 7.3.2 Natural Environment Objective 2 (NEO2) ........................................................................ 50 7.3.3 Natural Environment Objective 3 (NEO3) ........................................................................ 52 7.3.4 Natural Environment Objective 4 (NEO4) ........................................................................ 53 7.3.5 Natural Environment Objective 5 (NEO5) ........................................................................ 54 7.3.6 Natural Environment Objective 6 (NEO6) ........................................................................ 55

8 Business 8.1 A business profile of the town ................................................................................................. 56 8.2 Community feedback .............................................................................................................. 57 8.3 Business objectives and policies ............................................................................................ 58

8.3.1 Business Objective 1 (BO1) ............................................................................................. 59 8.3.1 Business Objective 2 (BO2) ............................................................................................. 61 8.3.2 Business Objective 3 (BO3) ............................................................................................. 62 8.3.3 Business Objective 4 (BO4) ............................................................................................. 62

9 Retail 9.1 A retail profile of the town ....................................................................................................... 63 9.2 Community feedback .............................................................................................................. 64 9.3 Retail objectives and policies .................................................................................................. 64

9.3.1 Retail Objective 1 (RO1) .................................................................................................. 65 9.3.1 Retail Objective 2 (RO2) .................................................................................................. 67

10 Tourism 10.1 Background .......................................................................................................................... 68 10.2 Community feedback ............................................................................................................ 68 10.3 Tourism objectives and policies ............................................................................................ 69

10.3.1 Tourism Objective 1 (TO1) ............................................................................................. 69 10.3.2 Tourism Objective 2 (TO2) ............................................................................................. 70

11 The Town Masterplan 11.1 Overall site allocation ........................................................................................................... 73 11.2 Town centre opportunities .................................................................................................... 74 11.3 Getting Around ..................................................................................................................... 75 11.4 Parking ................................................................................................................................. 77 11.5 Town centre vision................................................................................................................ 78

11.5.1 Shared space town centre ............................................................................................. 79 11.5.2 Frenchman’s Road area ................................................................................................ 83 11.5.3 Former Police Station and Hylton Road area ................................................................. 83 11.5.4 Central car park and Physic Garden area ...................................................................... 84 11.5.5 Festival Hall area ........................................................................................................... 85

12 Design Frameworks 12.1 Typical densities ................................................................................................................... 86 12.2 The site Design Frameworks ................................................................................................ 87 12.3 Site allocations ..................................................................................................................... 89 12.1 Site H1 Design Framework – Land at Causeway Farm ........................................................ 90 12.2 Site H3 Design Framework – Penns Field ............................................................................ 91 12.3 Site H4 and H7 Design Framework – Land south of Larcombe Road and west of the

Causeway ............................................................................................................................ 92 12.4 Site H5 Design Framework – Land south of the Causeway .................................................. 93 12.5 Site H8 Design Framework – Land south of Durford Road ................................................... 94 12.6 Site H9 Design Framework – Hampshire County Council Depot off Paddock Way ............... 95 12.7 Site H10 Design Framework – Community Centre site ......................................................... 96

September 2015 iii Petersfield Neighbourhood Development Plan

12.8 Site H11 Design Framework – Land to north of Reservoir Lane ........................................... 97 12.9 Site H12 Design Framework – Land at Bulmer House site, off Ramshill ............................... 98 12.10 Sites B1 & H2 Design Framework – Land north of Buckmore Farm ..................................... 99 12.11 Site B2 Design Framework – Land at The Domes ............................................................. 101 12.12 Site B6 Design Framework – car park off Frenchman’s Road ............................................ 102

13 Supporting Documents and References 13.1 Supporting Documents ....................................................................................................... 103 13.2 References ......................................................................................................................... 104

14 Acknowledgements

Annex A – Viability Analysis

Annex B – Housing Mix Analysis

Annex C – Self & Custom Build

Annex D – Aspirational Policies

Annex E – A3 Maps

September 2015 iv Petersfield Neighbourhood Development Plan

Tables

Table 1 - Site allocation for housing ................................................................................................ 12 Table 2 - Housing mix ..................................................................................................................... 13 Table 3 - Minimum parking requirements for new developments ..................................................... 21 Table 4 - Minimum secure cycle storage requirements for new developments ................................ 21 Table 5 - Community facilities ......................................................................................................... 43 Table 6 - Green space allocations ................................................................................................... 50 Table 7 - Employment site allocations ............................................................................................. 60 Table 8 - Town centre opportunities ................................................................................................ 74 Table 9 - Proposed traffic improvements ......................................................................................... 76 Table 10 - Proposed pedestrian and cycle improvements ............................................................... 76 Table 11 - Housing and employment site references and names .................................................... 89 Table 12 - Summary of Market Demand Analysis .......................................................................... 112 Table 13 - Proposed breakdown by dwelling type ......................................................................... 112

Figures

Figure 1 - Plan area .......................................................................................................................... 2 Figure 2 - Qualifying Parishes for Local Connection criteria ............................................................ 19 Figure 3 - Areas of Special Housing Character ............................................................................... 29 Figure 4 - Petersfield Settlement Boundary ..................................................................................... 30 Figure 5 - Comparison of existing and revised Settlement Boundary............................................... 31 Figure 6 - Town centre boundaries and shopping frontages ............................................................ 65 Figure 7 - Overall site allocation ...................................................................................................... 73 Figure 8 - Town centre opportunities ............................................................................................... 74 Figure 9 - Traffic and cycling improvements .................................................................................... 75 Figure 10 - Parking strategy ............................................................................................................ 77 Figure 11 - The town centre vision .................................................................................................. 78 Figure 12 - Potential shared space scheme viewed from the NW corner of The Square ................. 81 Figure 13 - Potential shared space scheme viewed from the bottom of Lavant Street ..................... 81 Figure 14 - Potential shared space scheme viewed from the corner of Chapel Street and Lavant

Street ............................................................................................................................ 82 Figure 15 - Example of block layouts ............................................................................................... 87 Figure 16 - Design framework notation ............................................................................................ 88 Figure 17 - Site allocations and reference codes ............................................................................. 89 Figure 18 - Petersfield's age distribution compared with England and the South East ................... 110 Figure 19 - Percentage of Homes constructed via self or custom build methods ........................... 114

September 2015 1 Petersfield Neighbourhood Development Plan

1 Introduction

1.1 Why do we need this plan?

The Petersfield Neighbourhood Plan, led by the Town Council, started back in September 2011. The Town Council wanted the people of Petersfield to have a say in all aspects of the future of the town but most importantly it wanted local people to decide where new housing should go, rather than leaving this decision to East Hampshire District Council (EHDC) and the South Downs National Park Authority (SDNPA).

Petersfield’s Neighbourhood Plan sets out a vision for the area that reflects the thoughts and feelings of local people with a real interest in their community. The Plan sets objectives on key themes such as moving around, housing, employment, green space and community facilities. It builds on current and planned activity and says what the Town Council and its partners will work towards. Throughout, we have ensured that the principles and policies set out in the plan reflect both national planning guidance, as well as the Joint Core Strategy produced by the SDNPA and EHDC.

The Town Council is committed to developing and strengthening the contacts and groups that have evolved as a result of the Neighbourhood Planning process. It believes that by working together to implement the Plan it will make Petersfield an even better place to live, work and enjoy.

1.2 What does the plan do?

The Petersfield Neighbourhood Plan is an opportunity for the residents of the town to look forward fifteen to twenty years in order to help plan and shape the way the town will develop. Instead of piecemeal development being forced upon us, we are able to say how we want the layout of the town to evolve. This includes housing, schooling, employment, hotels, community, leisure and tourism facilities as well as better streets and transport. Importantly, the plan also says how we are going to ensure that both our built environment and the surrounding natural environment are conserved and enhanced as new development takes place.

1.3 Who authored this plan? This plan has been sponsored by Petersfield Town Council as the ‘qualifying body’ in accordance with the Neighbourhood Planning Regulations 2012. The development of the plan has been overseen by a Steering Group and executed by a Project Group. These groups were drawn from: Petersfield Town Councillors (3) East Hants District Councillors (2) East Hants District Council Officers (1) South Downs National Park Authority Officers (3) Local resident volunteers (12) Whilst limited funds were made available by the Town Council and additional funding provided by the SDNPA, the production of this plan would not have been possible without the local resident volunteers. Other individuals and organisations that have assisted in the production of this plan are acknowledged in section 14.


1.4 How was this plan formed? The process of creating this plan involved a series of stages. This began with community engagement events and workshops in order to understand the wishes of the community. Once these had been established, the group developed a vision for the plan backed up by a series of key principles. This vision and the principles were then used to guide the site selection process and to generate a series of objectives and policies for the plan. A detailed explanation of the planning process, with full lists of all the sites considered at each stage, is published in the ‘Forming the Plan’ supporting document and can be found on the Neighbourhood Plan website (www.petersfieldsplan.co.uk).

1.5 What area does this plan cover? The designated area covered by this plan is the parish of Petersfield, as shown in pale purple in Figure 1 below.

Figure 1 - Plan area

Map data ©2014 Google


1.6 How to read this plan

Section 2 sets out the guiding principles and vision for the remainder of the plan. This was derived directly from the community feedback that was received during numerous engagement events. Sections 3 to 10 discuss each of the plan’s 8 topic areas in turn. These sections explain the background context and constraints for each topic, outline the community’s feedback and then set out the objectives and supporting policies for each area. Objectives are in boxes with green backgrounds whilst policies are in boxes with blue backgrounds. It is the policies that will become part of the statutory planning regulations for Petersfield once the plan is adopted. Whilst most of the policies are relevant to land use, there are a number of policies which do not affect land use directly but are important aspirational policies that the Town Council will pursue in order to try and realise the plan’s vision. These policies are denoted by a pink background and are listed separately from the other policies in Annex D.

Section 11 is the town’s masterplan. This is a series of maps which illustrate what the plan is trying to achieve. These maps are referenced by the policies and thus form part of the plan’s formal planning guidance. A3 versions of the maps can be found in Annex E. Section 12 contains detailed design frameworks for each of the residential and employment development sites. These design briefs also form part of the plan’s formal planning guidance. Section 13 contains the details of supporting documents published with this plan as well as references. Where possible, referenced documents are also available on (or linked to) the Neighbourhood Plan website. Finally, section 14 contains acknowledgements.

OBJECTIVES SUPPORTING POLICIES

EXO1

Example Objective 1

EXP1

Example Policy 1

EXP2

Example Policy 2 – aspirational policy

EXO2

Example Objective 2

EXP3

Example Policy 3

Example Policy 1 (EXP1)

Allocate development areas sufficient for a minimum of 700 new dwellings

This is where the detail of the policy can be found.

Example Policy 2 (EXP2)

Improve parking signage, designation / delineation and increase parking control zone

This is an aspirational policy which does not affect land use but is nevertheless important to the overall plan.


1.7 Additional copies of this plan This document can be viewed and printed from the Petersfield Neighbourhood Plan website: www.petersfieldsplan.co.uk Printed copies can be viewed at:

Petersfield Town Council. Town Hall, Heath Road, Petersfield, GU31 4EA

Tel: 01730 264182 Website: www.petersfield-tc.gov.uk

http://www.petersfieldsplan.co.uk/

http://www.petersfield-tc.gov.uk/


2 The Vision for Petersfield

2.1 What defines our town? Petersfield lies in the valley of the Western Rother, amid the chalk scarps and downs and the Wealden greensand ridges. It is a market town of great charm, with green fingers and streams that weave into and around its historic core of old buildings, many of which are listed. Petersfield has the medieval Market Square at its heart and the Heath as one of its green lungs. These areas contain evidence of their medieval and prehistoric origins and are important elements of the cultural depth of the town. The country is never far from the town and the well-used footpaths that radiate into and out of it are complemented by frequent long views to the heights of the surrounding landscape.

Sitting on the A3 and main railway line linking London to Portsmouth and the south, Petersfield is well connected and thus offers an attractive location for both commuters and businesses. The town is also a key point on east-west routes between Winchester and West Sussex. The creation of the South Downs National Park has resulted in both opportunities and constraints for the town. Any new development must now be carefully judged for its impact on the landscape and thus the town’s growth will inevitably be constrained. However, being at the heart of a national park offers Petersfield the opportunity to become a gateway town for people wishing to enjoy the surrounding countryside and thus develop its offering for tourists and visitors.

2.2 Key principles

The overwhelming view from local people is that Petersfield’s strength is that it is a ‘real market town’. In developing the plan we have therefore applied some overarching principles which are aimed at ensuring that Petersfield retains its market town character:

2.2.1 Petersfield must continue to feel ‘compact’

Petersfield currently has a population of around 15,000. We know this will grow, but we want to enable this growth without allowing the town to sprawl. At the heart of this feeling of compactness is ‘walkability’. The majority of people living in Petersfield are within about 10 minutes walk of the High Street. We want to try and keep it this way. Towns that move their residential and shopping areas to the perimeter quickly lose their soul, becoming uninviting and unattractive.

2.2.2 Petersfield must continue to act as a centre for the surrounding area As with any market town, Petersfield supports many people from the surrounding villages. In turn, these people make a significant contribution to the town’s economy. We therefore need to ensure that Petersfield continues to provide an appropriate range of employment, shopping, and community facilities, including education. We also need to ensure that people can access the town easily – this means sufficient parking, good public transport and safer streets, as well as easy walking and cycling options.

Rams Walk


2.2.3 Petersfield must retain its markets, festivals and events The regular markets are central to Petersfield’s character and identity - they must be maintained and helped to flourish. Seasonal festivals and events strengthen the town’s community spirit, provide a focus for people from the surrounding area and also make Petersfield a destination in its own right for people visiting the South Downs.

2.2.4 Petersfield must continue to have a close relationship with the surrounding countryside Petersfield is the second largest town in the South Downs National Park (and indeed of any of the UK National Parks) and is defined by its surrounding countryside. Just as it doesn’t take long to walk to the town centre, most residents live within about 15 minutes walk of open land. We need to retain the existing fingers of green space that bring the countryside into our town and thus allow the town to ‘breathe’. We also need to ensure that the size, form and location of new buildings doesn’t cut us off from the glorious views we enjoy of our surrounding landscape or detract unduly from the views that people enjoy when they view Petersfield from the surrounding areas. Our position within the National Park brings with it certain responsibilities and we must support the National Park Authority in its primary purposes and duty, which are: 1. To conserve and enhance the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the area. 2. To promote opportunities for the understanding and enjoyment of the special qualities

of national parks by the public. Working in partnership with other Local Authorities and other organisations, it is also the duty of the Authority to seek to foster the economic and social well-being of the local communities within the National Park.

Taking these principles and applying them to what the people of Petersfield told us they wanted to see in the future, has enabled us to develop a Vision of Petersfield in 2028.

2.3 The vision In the years up to and beyond 2028, the people of Petersfield will live in a thriving market town and recognised gateway to the South Downs National Park.

Careful development and use of space will have resulted in a town which still feels compact whilst being closely connected to the surrounding landscape through footpath and cycle links as well as its many green spaces.

Our town will have retained its market town character together with its historic heritage and assets, both designated and non-designated, further enhanced by the quality of its built and natural environment. Its vibrant town centre will be supported by a mix of retail, business and residential accommodation which meets the needs of the people of Petersfield and the surrounding areas whilst respecting the town’s heritage and setting within the South Downs National Park.

Map data ©2014 Google Imagery ©2014, Digitalglobe, Getmapping plc, Infoterra Ltd & Bluesky


2.4 Our community

We will live in a lively and inclusive community with a variety of community groups, organisations and local charities. Our community will be mixed, with people of all ages, backgrounds and ethnicity. These people will have opportunities to work in Petersfield and to live in the town in homes that they can afford. People of all ages will feel connected to their town and to each other. Petersfield will offer a range of leisure and community facilities which meet the needs of its residents with a strong emphasis on activities which make good use of the surrounding natural environment.

2.5 Our economy Our economy will be strong with a focus on local, quality products and services. The variety of activities on offer which relate to our natural environment mean that the town has become a key hub for people wishing to access the South Downs. We are able to offer our visitors a rich and varied range of shops, restaurants and services that make Petersfield a destination in itself. High quality offices with excellent communication links also make Petersfield a good place to do business.

2.6 Our homes

We will live in homes which are accessible, adaptable and affordable. The mix of housing that we will have achieved will ensure that we can meet the needs of all age groups including first time buyers, growing families and retirees. We will have ensured that all new housing is well designed, has been built to high standards, complements the character of the town and is highly energy efficient.

Photograph courtesy Petersfield Festivals


2.7 Our ability to move around the town

We will be able to move easily around the town with a network of footpaths and cycleways. Our town centre and residential streets will be designed to give pedestrians and cyclists priority over vehicles. When we need to travel further, we will enjoy excellent public transport facilities from community-led transport schemes employing sustainable modes of transport.

2.8 Our town’s relationship with the environment

Our town’s market town character, historic heritage and designated and non-designated assets together with its setting in the environment will have been preserved and enhanced. Biodiversity will have been encouraged throughout the town and, in particular, the Heath will have been sensitively managed and conserved. Walkways, cycleways and footpaths will enable us to access the surrounding countryside whilst new green spaces and recreational areas will have been created to balance new housing and thus retain the town’s essential character.


3 Housing 3.1 Housing in Petersfield Petersfield has a population of around 15,000 people living in just over 6,500 households. Analysis of the housing stock, demographic data and local housing market revealed:

Petersfield’s housing stock is fairly typical for East Hampshire and is made up of:

13% 1 bed, 25% 2 bed, 36% 3 bed, 19% 4 bed

and 7% 5 bed or more

The average price paid for a property in Petersfield in 2013 was £372,844 which is the second highest in Central Hampshire and fourteen times the average UK salary

An annual salary of more than £60,000 is needed to buy an average priced house in East Hants

Unsurprisingly, young people and first-time buyers therefore find it difficult to afford homes in Petersfield

Petersfield has significantly fewer inhabitants between the ages of 18 and 35 than the average for the South East

The demand for new affordable homes in Petersfield is between 32 and 74 per year. The majority of this demand is for one or two bedroom dwellings. We are currently unable to meet this demand

There is a shortage of reasonably priced (estimated to be around £250,000 to £350,000) family homes for local people

The percentage of the town’s inhabitants that are over 60 will increase from 28% to 38% over the next 15 years. That is an increase of around 1500 people

There is a lack of good quality 2 to 3 bedroom housing within walking distance of the centre of the town for retirees who wish to downsize

3.2 Community feedback about housing Our consultation with the community indicated that there was a strong feeling about housing. People felt that the plan should have things to say not only about where new housing is situated, but also about the type of housing as well as being clear about the levels of quality and design that we would like to see. Whilst many people were nervous about new development, the majority of people that we consulted recognised that there was a need for new housing in order to secure the town’s future prosperity. The key themes that emerged were:

Affordable housing and more housing for local people

Housing suitable for young people and first time buyers

Housing for growing families

Concern over the provision of housing for an ageing population

New homes should be of a high quality and fit in with the character of the town

New homes should be energy efficient and minimise any impact on the environment

The provision of parking and garden space is important


3.3 Freedoms and constraints on new residential development Whilst this plan embodies the wishes of the community of Petersfield, it must also meet the requirements set out in higher-level policies. Furthermore, in order to be found sound and therefore become part of the statutory planning regulations for our town, it must set out a strategy which is logical, achievable and supported by appropriate policies. In producing the Housing section of this plan, the planning group took into account the following key points:

1. The Joint Core Strategy (JCS)1 requires Petersfield to provide a minimum of 700 homes during the lifetime of the plan. We must satisfy this for our plan to be sound.

2. Any site allocated for residential development must have a reasonable prospect of coming forward for development during the lifetime of the plan. Whilst the planning group have made every effort to ensure that all the sites allocated meet this criterion, circumstances may change and individual landowners may make decisions that affect the provision of certain sites. In order to demonstrate that the plan has a realistic prospect of delivering 700 homes we have therefore allocated sufficient sites to deliver around 10% over the minimum of 700.

3. Our location within the National Park means that landscape impacts have a much higher

precedence than would normally be the case. In order to satisfy point 2 above, any site put forward in the plan should therefore be considered either to have an acceptable landscape impact, or be accompanied by realistic mitigation. The accompanying ‘Forming the Plan’ document provides more detail about how landscape impacts have been assessed.

3.4 Ensuring the viability of new development The plan’s consultation process showed that the people of Petersfield wanted to see high quality residential development. Wherever possible, those aspirations are reflected in the plan’s policies. However, we must ensure that the additional development costs that might result from our policies do not make development in Petersfield unviable. The planning group has therefore conducted a viability assessment of the plan’s policies which show that the cumulative additional costs of the plan’s policies do not make development unviable. This analysis is included at Annex A. However, the analysis did show that some of the more aspirational policies which were included in earlier drafts of the plan would have made development significantly more expensive and perhaps resulted in certain projects becoming unviable. These policies have therefore not been included in the final plan.

1 This is a joint strategy produced by the South Downs National Park and East Hants District Council. It was

adopted in June 2014.


3.5 Housing objectives and policies


HO1

Allocate sufficient development areas to meet the Joint Core Strategy target whilst ensuring an appropriate mix of housing to meet the town's future needs

HP1


HP2

Provide an appropriate mix of market housing

HP3

Allocate housing to meet the needs of an ageing population

HP4

Windfall sites

HP5

Delivery of infrastructure

HO2

Provide more affordable housing and more housing for local people

HP6

Provide affordable housing

HP7

Custom and self-build dwellings

HO3

Ensure that all new homes are built to appropriate standards

HP8

Quality and layout of housing developments


3.5.1 Housing Objective 1 (HO1) Allocate sufficient development sites to meet the requirements of the East Hampshire Joint Core Strategy whilst ensuring an appropriate mix of housing to meet the town’s future needs The Joint Core Strategy requires Petersfield to provide a minimum of 700 new dwellings over the next 15 years. In order to decide where these new dwellings should be built, the planning group have evaluated over 70 potential sites using the process described in the ‘Forming the Plan’ supporting document that accompanies this plan. The final set of allocated sites is shown in section 11.1 of this plan and listed in more detail in policy HP1 below. In addition, section 12 contains individual design frameworks for each site.

Table 1 - Site allocation for housing

Policy HP1 conforms to: NPPF paragraphs 17, 47, 50 and 159. JCS Policies CP1 (Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development), CP2 (Spatial Strategy) and CP10 (Spatial Strategy and Housing)

Housing Policy 1 (HP1)


Planning permission will be granted for new residential development on the sites set out in Table 1 and, as detailed in section 11, provided that the proposals conform to the design principles and delivery considerations set out in section 12 and meet the requirements set out in other appropriate policies of this Plan and the East Hampshire District Local Plan: Joint Core Strategy. Note that the site plans set out in section 12 are illustrative and not mandatory.

Site Ref.

Site Name Indicative no. of

dwellings

Notes / Constraints

H1 Land at Causeway Farm Up to 200

H2 Land north of Buckmore Farm and west of Bell Hill

101 Self or Custom Build only (see HP7)

H3 Penns Field 89

H4 Land south of Larcombe Road 71

H5 Land south east of the Causeway

71 Planning permission already granted for 71 dwellings

H6 Town centre redevelopment opportunities

58 See section 11.2 for further detail

H7 Land west of the Causeway 64

H8 Land south of Durford Road Minimum of

48

Housing for an ageing population

(see HP3)

H9 Hampshire County Council Depot off Paddock Way

42

H10 Existing Community Centre site 10 Only viable once a new Community Centre has been provided elsewhere

H11 Land north of Reservoir Lane 11 Self or Custom Build only (see HP7)

H12 Land at Bulmer House site off Ramshill

40 Housing for an ageing population

(see HP3)

Total 805


The Petersfield Neighbourhood Plan group commissioned two independent analyses of Petersfield’s housing need which looked at existing housing stock, together with demographic trends and market demand. These studies revealed three distinct groups for which the town needs to provide more housing:

Young people and first time buyers

Growing families

Retiring downsizers

The plan’s target market housing mix was developed from these studies and policy HP2 mandates a mix of housing in new developments which will provide a balanced provision which is appropriate to the specific demands of Petersfield. The detailed analysis behind the housing mix figures is shown in more detail at Annex B. It should be noted that policy HP6 deals with affordable housing which, by its nature is likely to be predominantly 1 or 2 bedroomed.

Table 2 - Housing mix

Policy HP2 conforms to: NPPF, paragraphs 50 and 159. JCS Policy CP11 (Housing Tenure, Type and Mix)

A specific concern that was repeatedly expressed by the community was the provision of housing for an ageing population. This concern is well founded as our analysis has shown that we can expect the number of people over 60 in Petersfield to increase by over 1500 to become 38% of the population over the lifetime of the Plan2.

2 CBA Detailed Housing Requirement, Oct 13, Paragraph 29.


Provide an appropriate mix of market housing

Market housing proposals will be expected to provide a mix of sizes of units, where appropriate, in accordance with the percentages set out in Table 2. The overall achievement of the mix of unit sizes will be monitored as part of the Annual Monitoring Report.

Dwellings designed to be suitable for older residents (aged 60 and over) must demonstrate, as a minimum, that they meet the space and accessibility requirements of the Lifetime Homes standards. These dwellings will also be suitable for younger residents and are not intended to be restricted in use.

Dwelling Type % of total % of the total of this type of property that should be

suitable for older residents

One Bed 5%

Two Bed 20% 35%

Three Bed 30% 75%

Four Bed 40%

Other 5%


The Plan therefore allocates two sites specifically for the provision of housing which is suitable for the on-going needs of older people. The National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG)3 states that this sort of allocation can be counted as part of the plan’s overall housing allocation. However, it should be noted that site H8 in particular was not considered suitable for conventional residential housing due to its distance from the town centre. In contrast, a residential care facility does not generate the same amount of traffic and its occupants are, in the main, unlikely to be able to walk any significant distance with transport therefore being provided by minibus. It was also considered inappropriate for these sites to provide affordable housing due to the nature of their use and thus a financial contribution will be expected in lieu. Policy HP2 therefore specifies that a proportion of new market housing must be suitable for, but not restricted to, older people whilst policy HP3 allocates specific sites for the provision of dedicated accommodation and facilities for an ageing population.

Policy HP3 conforms to: NPPF para 50 and 159. JCS Policies CP10 (Spatial Strategy for Housing), CP11 (Housing Tenure, Type and Mix) and CP12 (Housing and Extra Care Provision for the Elderly) As part of the planning process, an exhaustive evaluation of potential development sites has been undertaken. Nevertheless, it is likely that during the lifetime of the plan, other sites within the town may come forward for residential development. These are commonly referred to as Windfall Sites. The JCS housing allocations include an allowance of 105 dwellings on windfall sites in Petersfield4 and they are not therefore included within our new allocations shown in Table 1. When these sites do come forward, policy HP4 permits their development outwith the allocations at Table 1, as long as the proposals conform to other relevant policies within this plan.

3 NPPG, Housing and economic land availability assessment: Methodology – Stage 5, para 037, Reference ID:

3-037-20140306 4 Joint Core Strategy, Appendix 2, Page 113


Allocate housing to meet the needs of an ageing population

Sites H8 (Land at Durford Road) and H12 (Bulmer House Site) – are allocated as specialist housing and Continuing Care facilities to meet the on-going and changing needs of older persons. These sites are not allocated for conventional housing. Planning permission will be granted for such developments so long as the proposals conform with the site design frameworks in this Plan and meet the requirements set out in other appropriate policies of this Plan as well as those within the East Hampshire District Local Plan: Joint Core Strategy. The proposed developments will not be expected to provide on site affordable housing but the developer will be required to make a financial contribution which will be agreed with the Local Planning Authority.


Policy HP4 conforms to: NPPF paragraphs 17, 47, 50 and 159. JCS Policies CP1 (Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development), CP2 (Spatial Strategy) and CP10 (Spatial Strategy and Housing) The community was also concerned that development would outstrip the provision of supporting infrastructure. Policy HP5 therefore requires infrastructure to keep pace with the building of new dwellings over the lifetime of the plan.

Policy HP5 conforms to: JCS Policy CP10 (Spatial Strategy for Housing)


Windfall sites

Permission will be granted for small residential developments on infill and redevelopment sites within the built up area, subject to proposals being well designed and meeting relevant requirements set out in other policies in this Plan and the East Hampshire Local Plan – Joint Core Strategy.


Delivery of infrastructure

a) New development will contribute towards new infrastructure or improve the capacity of existing infrastructure to mitigate its impact and support future residents and businesses.

b) Critical service and utility infrastructure will be provided on-site by the developer and utility providers to ensure development is properly serviced.

c) In addition, a suitable package of supporting infrastructure will be negotiated by the National Park Authority in liaison with Petersfield Town Council and secured through legal agreements to ensure the development is acceptable in planning terms, self-supporting and its impacts are properly mitigated.

d) On-site infrastructure will be secured through legal agreements based on the needs of each proposal (or group of proposals) and delivered directly by the developer or through financial contributions and/or land. Infrastructure delivery will be integrated with development phasing to ensure timely provision and commuted payments will secure necessary future maintenance.

e) The design of infrastructure through partnership working with developers and infrastructure providers should reflect the high quality landscape and ensure, where possible, benefits to the economic and social well being of the local community.


3.5.2 Housing Objective 2 (HO2) Provide more affordable housing and more housing for local people Petersfield is an expensive place to live and many people who would like to live in the town, often because of family connections, cannot afford to do so. Analysis of the number of people waiting for affordable housing has shown that demand is considerably more than is currently available. However, any policy to increase the amount of affordable housing must ensure that housing stock and population mix remain balanced whilst new development must also be financially viable. Policy HP6 therefore requires that a percentage all new developments must be affordable dwellings.

Policy HP6 conforms to: NPPF paragraphs 50 and 159. JCS Policy CP13 (Affordable Housing on Residential Development Sites)


Provide affordable housing

a) Proposals for new residential development that maximise the delivery of affordable housing and provide for the size, type and tenure of homes to meet local needs as set out in this policy will be permitted, provided they comply with other relevant policies. The application of this policy will maintain a focus on affordable housing, but will be sufficiently flexible to take account of viability and changing market conditions over time.

b) A target of at least 40% of all net dwellings (C3 use class) on schemes of 6 or more units will be provided as affordable homes in perpetuity to meet local needs.

c) Development of 11 or more net dwellings will provide affordable housing on-site unless in exceptional circumstances when the Planning Authority, at its discretion, may accept an alternative form of delivery in a cascade of forms with first preference for provision on an alternative site in Petersfield, then the provision of serviced land in lieu and then a financial contribution in lieu.

d) Development of 6 to 10 net dwellings will provide affordable housing on-site where possible. Where on-site provision is not possible in whole or in part, commuted financial payments in lieu will be accepted.

e) The layout and design of affordable housing will be appropriately integrated into each development so affordable housing is indistinguishable from the equivalent market housing. Affordable housing should be spread carefully through the development, not isolated in specific blocks.

f) The size (number of bedrooms), type (flat, house, extra care etc) and tenure (social and affordable rented, intermediate, shared ownership or other) of affordable homes for each proposal will be based on up-to-date evidence of local needs. A suitable mix will be determined through discussions between the applicant and South Downs National Park Authority in liaison with East Hampshire District Council, Petersfield Town Council, and Rural Housing Enablers where applicable.

g) The eligibility for affordable housing will be administered by EHDC as the Housing Authority. The definition of local need is therefore as laid down by the Hampshire Home Choice service’s Allocation Framework. However, priority will be given in the first instance.to people who can demonstrate a local connection to Petersfield


Another mechanism for providing affordable housing for local people is to enable people to build their own homes, or have them custom-built to their own specification. Government figures indicate that 53% of people would wish to be able to build or specify a new dwelling and the self-build register on the neighbourhood plan website demonstrated strong support from the local community with many people ready to build if the land was made available. Self-build dwellings are likely to cost less than the market equivalent and the dwellings that are built will tend to be better quality with more innovative architecture than a standard developer's offering. Policy HP7 therefore encourages self-build and specifically allocates two sites for self and custom-built homes. Furthermore, it restricts the ownership of individual plots on these sites to individuals with a local connection. The planning group believe that there is strong demand for this sort of provision with between 40 and 130 people actively seeking self-build plots in the Petersfield area. There are a number of government initiatives in place to try and develop this type of housing, including proposals for Community Right to Build. The demand for this sort of housing is therefore only likely to increase over the lifetime of the plan. However, it is recognised that this is a significant and unusual allocation which will present challenges in terms of providing coherent supporting infrastructure and services. There are a number of developers who are now adopting a self or custom-build model and acting as the co-ordinating agent for the site’s infrastructure development. Alternatively, this sort of housing has been delivered in the UK by Community Land Trusts and Co-housing groups. The planning group’s assessment is therefore that, whilst this is a bold allocation, it is realistic and deliverable with a little enthusiasm and imagination. Such a radical allocation does however present risk and it is conceivable that the self-build sites may not deliver housing as envisaged. It is therefore the Town Council’s intention to review these sites after five years and, if, despite having been properly prepared and marketed, plots remain available, it will consider whether these sites should be re-allocated as conventional housing. The sites allocated for self or custom-build were chosen as they had no pre-existing developer interest or option at the time the draft plan was first published. Thus, there was no overt expectation from the landowner that these sites were to be allocated for residential housing. Furthermore, one area of site H2 is under Local Authority ownership which, under the emerging Right to Build legislation, will be required to make land available to self-builders. A more detailed analysis of the likely demand for this type of housing in the Petersfield area, together with a discussion as to how a large development of self or custom built homes might be delivered, is included at Annex C.


Policy HP7 conforms to: NPPF paragraphs 50 and 159. JCS Policies CP10 (Spatial Strategy for Housing), CP11 (Housing Tenure, Type and Mix), CP13 (Affordable Housing on Residential Development Sites)


Custom and self-build dwellings

Sites H2 and H11, as shown in Table 1, are allocated wholly as self-build sites.

Subject to the application conforming with the appropriate site design brief in section 12 of this Plan and meeting the requirements set out in other appropriate policies of this Plan as well as those within the East Hampshire District Local Plan: Joint Core Strategy, then:

a) Planning permission to ‘set out’ sites H2 and H11 as individual or collections of serviced plots together with the associated supporting infrastructure, will be granted.

b) Planning permission for either individual self-build or custom-build dwellings on plots within sites H2 and H11 submitted by an individual, by a builder or a developer acting on behalf of an individual, or by a community group of individuals such as a Community Land Trust, will be considered favourably.

c) Planning permission for a self-build dwelling will only be granted for applicants who:

i. Demonstrate that they have a Local Connection (see below) and

ii. Undertake in a section 106 agreement that the occupancy of the property will be restricted to people with a local connection in perpetuity and

iii. Undertake in a section 106 agreement that they will live in the property as their main residence once it is complete and

iv. Undertake in a section 106 agreement that once the development has commenced, they will complete the building of the dwelling within 2 years

d) Petersfield Town Council will review this policy at 5 year intervals following the adoption of the Petersfield Neighbourhood Development Plan to determine whether it is delivering new dwellings as intended. If the allocated sites have:

i. been properly prepared

ii. robustly marketed at a fair market rate as individual serviced plots,

but are not being developed at the rate required to deliver the 112 dwellings within the lifetime of the plan, then the Council will consider reallocating these sites, or parts of these sites, as conventional residential developments. The review will also consider the success or otherwise of the related local connections policy.


Figure 2 - Qualifying Parishes for Local Connection criteria

Continuation of Housing Policy 7 (HP7)

Custom and self-build dwellings – definition of Local Connection

For the purposes of this policy only, a Local Connection is classed as either being by

Residency or by Employment and is defined as follows: a. Residency qualification:

have been resident in Petersfield or a qualifying parish for 12 continuous months at the time of application or

have lived in Petersfield or a qualifying parish for 3 out of previous 5 years or

have close family (mother, father, brother or sister, adult children or grandparent) who have been resident for 5 continuous years and continue to be resident in Petersfield or a qualifying parish.

b. Employment qualification. An individual will be considered to have a Local Connection if

he/she or his/her partner is in employment which meets all of the following criteria:

the office or business establishment at which a person is based or from where their work is managed is within Petersfield or a qualifying parish and

is in paid employment and

works a minimum of 16 hours per week and

has been employed for a minimum of 12 continuous months at the time of their application and is currently in employment and

has a permanent or fixed term contract or is self-employed.

Qualifying parishes are: Colemore and Priors Dean, Hawkley, Greatham, Liss, Rogate, Harting, Buriton, Stroud, Langrish, East Meon, Steep, Froxfield and Sheet. These parishes are shown in

Figure 2 below.



3.5.3 Housing Objective 3 (HO3)

Ensure that all new homes are built to appropriate standards The UK builds some of the smallest homes in the world. This was reflected in the feedback from the community which indicated that people found many modern homes too small. Small homes are also more difficult to adapt for people with disabilities or for older people who have difficulties with mobility. All new homes built in Petersfield will meet or exceed the national spaces standards as set out in the government’s Technical housing standards – nationally described space standard paper or any subsequent revisions thereafter. The community felt very strongly that Petersfield is a special place to live and that new developments should be of a high standard of design and construction. The Design Council has produced an industry code called Building for Life which sets out standards for items such as character, street layout, car parking and public/private spaces. Policy HP8 requires new developments to meet the standards in all 12 sections of this code and also specifies minimum levels of vehicle and cycle parking. Built Environment Policy 1 (BEP1) provides further guidance on how all new buildings (not just housing) must reinforce the town’s character. Further information on Building for Life 12 is available from www.builtforlifehomes.org.


Quality and layout of housing developments

Proposals for new housing on the allocated sites will be expected to be of high standard of design, layout and construction which reflect Petersfield’s character, identity and distinctive setting in the South Downs National Park. Applicants of the allocated sites must demonstrate how their proposals meet the specific site design briefs as laid out in this plan. In particular, the housing layout shall include adequate parking areas, green space, landscaping and access for disabled people.

All applications for new homes shall include a Building for Life 12 assessment and proposals will be expected to score positively (predominantly green) against the criteria. Only in exceptional circumstances, when all other options have been explored, will a red score be permitted.

Proposals will also be expected to conform to, wherever possible, the ‘Secured by Design’ New Homes Guide.

Specific requirements for off-street parking spaces are set out in Table 3 and for secure cycle storage facilities in Table 4. These requirements can be modified at the discretion of the planning authority if circumstances dictate – for example, town centre sites or retirement communities where the full parking allocation may be inappropriate or unviable. Regard will be had to the factors specified in paragraph 39 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). Parking spaces should include an appropriate number of larger spaces for disabled residents. Cycle storage facilities shall be covered, with fixings set in or attached to a permanent structure.

Policy HP8 conforms to: NPPF paragraphs 58 and 64. JCS Policy CP29 (Design) and CP24 (Sustainable Construction)

http://www.builtforlifehomes.org/


Size of dwelling

Minimum parking spaces

Studio 1

1 bed 1

2 bed 2

3 bed 2

4 bed 3

5 bed or more 4

Table 3 - Minimum parking requirements for new developments

Size of dwelling

Minimum secure cycle storage spaces

Studio 1

1 bed 1

2 bed 2

3 bed 2

4 bed or more 4

Table 4 - Minimum secure cycle storage requirements for new developments


4 The Built Environment

4.1 Background The built environment is the most visible aspect of our cultural heritage. Petersfield is the second largest town in the South Downs National Park and therefore its built environment is one of the key defining characteristics that underpin its quality of life and its identity as a place attractive to business, residents and visitors.

4.2 Setting and special character The historic development of the town is centred on St. Peter’s Church giving it even today a relatively compact commercial town centre based on the High Street and the Square. This is the focal point of the town, being originally the market place and it remained in use as a cattle market until well into the 20th century. The prosperity of the town was originally founded on wool. Cloth manufacture and the leather and the tanning industries were also important, as were the inns that supported the coaching trade on the main London to Portsmouth road.

The arrival of the railway in 1859 transformed the town, making the coaching trade obsolete, bringing new commerce, new housing and an increased population. Victorian and Edwardian residential development focussed on both sides of the railway station. Like many rural towns, Petersfield remained almost untouched by new development until the 1960s, after which new housing estates were incrementally added around the edges of the town.

The town’s location close to the chalk of the South Downs to the south, the Hangers to the north and within the Rother Valley - a mosaic of farmland and woodland, much of it of great time depth- creates an enclosed landscape with numerous sunken lanes and ancient tracks. The town nestles discretely within its landscape, barely visible from the surrounding hills and almost hidden from its approach roads. From the town, views out both north and south mean that its built-up areas are well related to the adjoining countryside and the feel of a market town is created.

The policies of this Plan are intended to enhance the town’s setting in the South Downs National Park in accordance with the Park’s statutory purposes and duties, which give great weight to its high quality landscape, natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage. The Plan seeks to ensure that the character and heritage of the town in terms of its listed buildings, designated and non-designated assets, ancient monuments, focal points and buildings of architectural quality are respected and strengthened, together with its key views and vistas. The Statutory List for Petersfield currently has over 100 listed entries, covering a range of buildings and structures. These are all grade II listed apart from St. Peter’s Church and the Statue of King William III in the Square, which are both Grade I. In addition, there are a number of buildings and structures which can be identified as having local significance, but may not merit statutory listing which will need to be included in a ‘Local List’ when it is drawn up and adopted. Such designated and non-designated assets are a key component of the town’s special character and heritage which must be recognised in relevant development proposals.


The Petersfield Conservation Area Character Appraisal and Management Plan 2014 identifies the character and positive qualities of the Conservation Area highlighting key issues and putting forward proposals for its management over the next 5 years. It provides detailed guidance and actions to be undertaken by the South Downs National Park Authority. The Plan seeks to incorporate the key recommendations of the Conservation Appraisal and Management Plan in its policies. The Appraisal should inform and set the context for the submission of planning applications in the Conservation Area. The Plan also recognises the design guidance of the approved Petersfield Town Design Statement 2010, which highlights the qualities of the town and shows how these can be enriched as the town develops. Section 6.0 Design and Architectural Guidance of the Design Statement is particularly important in that it provides design objectives and guidance to ensure that the town’s essential character is maintained and enhanced. It encourages the use of local design and vernacular together with high quality materials and illustrates these with examples from the town. The design guidance of the Petersfield Design Statement should likewise inform and be taken into account in submitting planning applications.

4.3 Community feedback Residents’ surveys for Petersfield Tomorrow’s Market Town Health Check (2006), the Petersfield Town Design Statement (2010) and for this Plan have all indicated very strong support for retaining the town’s character, conserving its setting and ensuring that all future developments are appropriate to its scale, character and ambience. The Petersfield Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Plan (2014) had a similar response to its consultation programme. In particular, community feedback for this Plan has reinforced concerns about:

Development pressures affecting the character of the conservation area

The need to maintain the town’s historic buildings

Conserving back gardens and green spaces

Shop fronts that fail to reflect the National Park and town character

Lack of maintenance of pavements and footways

Illegal parking

Excessively high densities in the town centre


4.4 Built Environment objectives and policies


BEO1

Conserve and enhance the character and quality of the town's built environment and ensure good quality design

BEP1

The character, setting and quality of the town’s built environment

BEP2

The character of the Conservation Area

BEP3

Key focal points and buildings in the Conservation Area

BEP4

Shop fronts in the Conservation Area

BEP5

Areas of Special Housing Character

BEP6

The Settlement Boundary

BEO2

Ensure development is energy efficient, sustainable and adaptable to climate change

BEP7

Sustainable and adaptable buildings


4.4.1 Built Environment Objective 1 (BEO1)

Conserve and enhance the character and quality of the town’s built environment and ensure good quality design Good quality design has been strongly supported by the evidence presented for this plan - the various studies undertaken in recent years, particularly the Petersfield Town Design Statement, government guidance and through the consultations that have been undertaken. Joint Core Strategy (JCS) policy 27, Design, requires new development to respect the character, identity and context of towns such as Petersfield and to be of exemplary standard with criteria establishing how it should make a positive contribution to its local distinctiveness and the setting and context of the National Park. However, policy BEP1 goes further and sets additional criteria against which proposals can be measured and assessed so that the town’s character is respected and enhanced.

Built Environment Policy 1 (BEP1)

The character, setting and quality of the town’s built environment

All development will be expected to meet the highest standards of design and make a positive contribution to the character of Petersfield. Proposals must respect and enhance Petersfield’s distinctive built character and its high quality countryside setting. Where innovative and contemporary designs are proposed, they must be complementary to their context. All proposals should take account of any design guidance or code issued by the South Downs National Park Authority (SDNPA) and should also consider using the ‘Building in Context Toolkit’ produced by English Heritage and CABE.

In determining proposals for planning permission the Petersfield Town Design Statement and its design guidance will also be used and account will be taken where appropriate of:

The character, setting and context of the site in relation to its scale, landscape, townscape, building types, grain of plots and streets

Density that is appropriate to its context and relationship to local facilities and transport

A layout that demonstrates how buildings and spaces relate to each other and a coherent and legible structure or hierarchy of routes and spaces

The massing and built form to ensure that a sense of place will be created and that there is sensitivity in terms of townscape design in respect of edge treatment, entrances, enclosures, active frontages, heights and rooflines

Landscape design that contributes to a sustainable sense of place, such as play areas, shelters, biodiversity and wildlife corridors and water

Materials and details relating to the design and context for walls, roofs, openings, paved surfaces and signage

• Sustainable principles such as the curtilage storage of waste and recyclable material, home-working and the durability and adaptability of buildings over time

Policy BEP1 conforms to: JCS Policy CP29, CP30 and NPPF, paragraphs 56, 57, 58, 60, 61


The conservation area is a key part of our town and must be carefully managed in order to conserve and enhance the overall built environment. Policy BEP2 therefore requires any development within the conservation area to conform to the Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Plan (CAAMP) and also sets additional criteria which must be followed. Policy BEP3 goes on to identify the key focal points and buildings within the conservation areas that must be considered when evaluating any new development or alteration.


The character of the conservation area

All developments within the town centre Conservation Area should positively contribute to the conservation and management of the Conservation Area having taking account of the Conservation Area Appraisal and Management Plan (CAAMP), the Petersfield Town Design Statement and the archaeological record. In particular proposals will be expected to sustain and enhance the heritage assets including putting buildings to viable new use consistent with their conservation. New development will be expected to make a positive contribution to the local character and distinctiveness of the Conservation Area particularly having regard to the following features of the area namely :

Simple building forms and domestic scale

Use of traditional building materials including red brick, ironstone and malmstone, stucco and rendering, some galleting, and some hanging and mathematical tiles on elevations

Archaeological sensitivity

Burgage plots

Varied roofscape, including multiple and steeply pitched roofs of clay tiles, natural slates and occasional large chimney stacks

Fenestration including sash and oriel windows and traditional shopfronts

Focal points including prominent views, buildings and structures identified in the CAAMP

Heritage assets identified through the CAAMP for inclusion on the local list

Boundary walls and use of traditional materials in the public realm

Vibrant mix of office space and residential uses above ground floor shops and services

Visually important trees

Policy BEP2 conforms to: JCS Policy CP30 and NPPF, paragraphs 58, 64, 60, 115, 128, 138, 133, 134)


Much of the character of our town centre is derived from its retail buildings and thus appropriate and high quality shopfront design is key in ensuring we retain Petersfield’s essential and attractive character. Policy BEP4 therefore mandates a series of characteristics for new or replacement shopfronts.


Key focal points and buildings in the Conservation Area

New development which affects the setting of

• The Spain • The Square • The junction of High Street, College Street, Dragon Street and Heath Road

will be expected to preserve and enhance the key focal points identified by the Conservation Area Appraisal and then be assessed for their visual prominence and architectural quality. Particular regard will be had to ensure against the loss, inappropriate alteration or compromise of the setting of the following:

• St Peter’s Church • The King William III statue in The Market Square • No. 36 High Street • Goodyers, The Spain • The NatWest Bank, No. 15 High Street • The war memorial, High Street • The Festival Hall, Heath Road • The Red Lion Public House, College Street • The Old College, College Street • Petersfield Railway Station • Roman Catholic Church of St Laurence, Station Road • The Petersfield Methodist Church, Station Road


Shop Fronts in Conservation Area

New shopfronts and all associated advertisements within the Town Centre Conservation Area, will be expected to comply with the requirements of the EHDC Shopfronts Design Guide (2003), the Petersfield Town Design Statement (2010) and the CAAMP listings of historic interest as well as any future shopfront guidance that may be produced by the SDNPA. In particular proposals will be expected to:

Preserve any existing features of interest, such as original fascia boards, corbel brackets, mullions etc

Be made of timber, and painted an appropriate colour

Have a hand-painted traditional shop sign

Have a panelled, tiled, brick or rendered stall riser, as appropriate to the building

Allow the use of upper floors for residential use by providing, if needed, a separate access

Where appropriate incorporate well designed traditional hanging signs

Policy BEP3 conforms to: JCS Policy CP30 and NPPF, paragraphs 58, 64, 115, 128, 129, 132 138, 133, 134)

Policy BEP4 conforms to: JCS Policy CP30 and NPPF, paragraphs 58, 64, 60, 67, 126


The East Hampshire Plan Second Review contains Policy H9 – ‘Areas of Special Housing Character’. This is a saved policy in compliance with the National Planning Policy Framework. It has been included in the Neighbourhood Plan to ensure completeness and for the avoidance of doubt. Within the town there are certain residential streets and areas which have been developed at a low density and provide substantial homes set in large plots, often with mature trees around them. Policy BEP5 lists those areas of special character which should be protected from further intensification of development or change of use in order to retain the important contribution which they make both to the variety of the housing stock and the street scene.


Areas of Special Housing Character

The following residential areas, as identified in Figure 3, have special character which it is important to protect:

Bell Hill

Heath Road

Heath Road East

Ramshill

Sussex Road

Tilmore Road

In order to maintain the important contribution which these areas make to the variety and character of the town, development will only be permitted that maintains the overall character of the area and does not have a detrimental impact.

Within these areas, the following will apply:

a. Replacement dwellings will only be permitted if they are on a ‘one-for-one’

basis; b. extensions to dwellings and ancillary detached buildings within the gardens

will be permitted providing they are in keeping with the scale and character of the property and its surroundings;

c. all development must retain or enhance the landscape setting of the site within its surroundings;

d. change of use from residential to other uses will not be permitted; and e. infilling development will not be permitted.

Policy BEP5 conforms to: JCS Policy CP29, CP30 and NPPF, paragraphs 56, 57, 58, 60, 61


Figure 3 - Areas of Special Housing Character

(Note: This map is reproduced in A3 format at Annex E)



In order to achieve the allocation for new dwellings and additional employment land required by the Joint Core Strategy (JCS), this Plan has allocated some sites which are outside the pre-existing settlement boundary. Policy BEP6 therefore redefines the settlement policy boundary for Petersfield to include the newly allocated sites. This revised Settlement Boundary for Petersfield is shown in Figure 4 with the changes from the previous boundary highlighted in Figure 5.

Figure 4 - Petersfield Settlement Boundary


The Settlement Boundary

Within the Settlement Boundary, there is a presumption in favour of sustainable development as defined in the policies of this Neighbourhood Plan.

Development will not normally be permitted on land which is within the parish of Petersfield but outside the Settlement Boundary.

The Settlement Boundary for Petersfield is as shown in Figure 4.



Figure 5 - Comparison of existing and revised Settlement Boundary

(existing shown in red)



4.4.2 Built Environment Objective 2 (BEO2) Ensure that development is energy efficient, sustainable and adaptable to climate change Ensuring that all new development is both highly energy efficient and sustainable is considered important by the people of Petersfield. There are a number of codes and mechanisms to try and achieve this which are currently in a state of flux with the government’s policy moving towards embodying all energy and carbon reduction targets within Building Regulations. Policy BEP7 therefore strongly encourages sustainable and zero carbon developments. BEP7 also mandates that new developments should not exacerbate flooding risks and thus specifies that they must have a neutral impact on surface water. This can be achieved using sustainable drainage systems together with permeable surfacing material for parking areas and pathways. Finally, BEP7 also required new development to be built in accordance with the ‘Secured by Design’ guidelines.


Sustainable and adaptable buildings

New development which demonstrates high levels of energy efficiency and sustainability will be strongly encouraged.

The significance and integrity of important historic assets can be threatened by poorly designed adaptation and mitigation responses to carbon efficiency and it is important that this is recognised in such development proposals.

Developments must demonstrate that they have a neutral or beneficial impact on surface water. Any new hard-standing areas must be permeable - this includes all new pavements, driveways and, where applicable, public rights of way, car parks and non-adoptable roads. The additional run-off for rainfall depths of up to 5mm caused by the development must be managed on site using appropriate Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS). Calculations should be presented to demonstrate that these criteria have been met.

Proposals will also be expected to conform to, wherever possible, the relevant ‘Secured by Design’ Design Guide.

Policy BEP7 conforms to: JCS Policy CP24, CP29, CP30 and NPPF, paragraphs 56, 93, 95, 115, 128, 133)


5 Getting Around

5.1 Background The building of the railways and the development of the old A3 as an important traffic route serving Portsmouth in both World Wars meant that the town retained its key position as a transport crossroads, linking northward to London, west to Winchester along the A272 and east to Midhurst. Chichester is accessible via the new A3 and via the B2146 (Sussex Road) towards South Harting and into the South Downs countryside.

The London to Portsmouth railway is an important passenger route. The station is busy at peak times with trains, buses, taxis, cars and pedestrians. Some bus services, although limited, link the town with Winchester and Bishops Waltham to the west, Chichester, Havant and Waterlooville to the south, Midhurst to the east and Liss and Alton to the north.

The railway serves the town at Petersfield Station, with the level crossing closing to traffic causing some tail-backs. This is more frequent at peak hours. There is an alternative for cars, light vans and lorries via Swan Street under the (height restricted) bridge.

After much public debate, Petersfield benefited from the construction of the new A3 bypass in 1993, which at that time removed much of the through traffic. The A3 currently forms an artificial, but well defined, western edge to the town. The bypass scheme included a demonstration project where the former A3 was realigned and its width reduced through the town centre running from north to south. This also included the enhancement of Dragon Street and High Street to make this area more attractive.

Since these changes both A3 traffic and through traffic have increased, particularly so since the Hindhead Tunnel was constructed. Traffic has also increased on the link access to the A272 towards Midhurst and the eastern side of the town. There are an increasing number of ‘rat-runs’ that result in vehicles travelling through residential areas at excessive speeds. The town also experiences heavy goods vehicles, using satellite navigation, diverting from their A3 principal route onto these minor roads. The overall result is more noise, pollution, increased danger to pedestrians and disruption to local traffic.

There are other problem areas and issues that require attention. These can be termed ‘hotspots’ and they concern junctions, regular breaking of speed limits in residential areas near schools, lack of crossings, poor footway links and insufficient safe cycling paths (both on-street and off-street) from home to school and to community facilities.

The main spine of the town centre runs west to east, starting at the railway station, running down Lavant Street, along Chapel Street, through the Square and along High Street to the war memorial. Lavant Street is the key link to the town station but lacks the sense of a ‘gateway’ to the town.


5.2 Community feedback The community’s views on transport issues in the town were:

Make the town more pedestrian and cycle friendly – a more ‘walkable’ town.

Reduce traffic speeds in the town centre, near schools and key streets in residential areas.

Developers should pay for new street design/calming to slow traffic on existing streets because most development will increase the frequency, amount and speed of traffic.

Routes to the town centre, in residential areas and near schools should be safer for pedestrians and far more conducive to cyclists.

Give pedestrians priority in the town centre, but do not fully pedestrianise. Allow traffic access albeit slowly.

More frequent, perhaps smaller, buses are needed to residential areas, community facilities, surrounding villages, the South Downs National Park and Queen Elizabeth Country Park. More buses to Hospitals, GP surgeries and to Winchester and Chichester are needed.

Co-ordinate bus routes and times with trains. More frequent, but smaller buses.

Create a larger more attractive and versatile Market Square that is traffic free and connects to the surrounding shops, creating larger outside space for cafés and restaurants.

Provide new/safer on-street cycle routes and more off-road routes to the countryside.

Extend the 20 mph zone to more of the town centre and to residential streets leading to schools.

More cycle parking in the town centre’s main streets.

Car parking costs need to be more sensitive to residents’ and visitor needs. More short stay parking and clearer signage. Provide free parking in central car park on Sunday. Car parking needs to be managed to ensure town centre vitality and viability. No multi-storey car park except near the station, but if necessary perhaps near the Tesco store. More people in Petersfield will be older, so more blue badge areas needed in town centre.

More car and cycle parking at the town station. Provide bus and cycle transport like other National Parks.

Resolve problems areas for traffic and crossing – these ‘hotspots’ are shown in section 11.3 of this plan.


5.3 Getting Around objectives and policies


GAO1

Make Petersfield a more pedestrian and cycle friendly place to live

GAP1

Provide pedestrian, cycle, and mobility scooter access to the town centre from new developments

GAP2

Improve the town’s pedestrian and cycle network

GAP3

Making our streets safer

GAO2

Improve the town centre spine from the station through to the war memorial, making it more pedestrian friendly, accessible to cyclists and enhancing its overall vitality

GAP4

Create a Shared Space and/or pedestrian/cycle priority friendly street design for the Town Centre Spine including the Market Square

GAO3 Improve both the management and provision of parking throughout the town

GAP5

Provide multi-level car parking at the railway station and north side of the Tesco car park

GAP6

Create access to Festival Hall car park off Tor Way

GAP7

Improve parking signage, designation / delineation and increase parking control zone

GAP8

Work with others to provide parking management that responds to user needs

GAO4

Encourage sustainable travel including local public transport and street environments that significantly reduce the impact of traffic on the town’s community life

GAP9

Improve the provision of bus services and co-ordination of services


5.3.1 Getting Around Objective 1 (GAO1) Make Petersfield a more pedestrian and cycle friendly place to live This objective addresses a number of issues raised by the community during the consultation progress. Specifically, it aims to achieve safer pedestrian and cycle movement throughout the town through, shared spaces, more crossing points, slower traffic speeds and improved street design. In accordance with the plan’s vision, we want to maintain the compactness of the town by ensuring good pedestrian and cycle connectivity from both new developments and existing residential areas to the town centre and key destinations, such as schools and leisure facilities around the town. Safer residential and school route streets will make it easier for people to move around, support the vitality of the town centre, enhance community life and reduce reliance on the car by encouraging walking and cycling. Policy GAP1 therefore mandates that new development should provide cycle and pedestrian access to the town centre, schools and nearby residential areas wherever possible and that they connect with existing routes. This policy also mandates that the Manual for Streets (MFS) design principles with shared space street design should be used.

Policy GAP1 conforms to: Hampshire County Council (HCC) East Hampshire District Transport Statement 2012, policy objectives D9 and D12 Note: This policy also applies to mobility scooters and electric pedal cycles. Policy GAP2 (Aspirational Policy – see Annex D) sets out the need to establish a rolling programme of cycle route and pedestrian improvements. These proposed improvements are also detailed in section 11.3 of this plan. This includes employment areas of the town. Policy GAP3 (Aspirational Policy – see Annex D) addresses street movement. It requires any new development to address the effects of traffic increases and speeds resulting from the development, particularly where existing problems will be compounded. It also sets out a list of existing problem areas or points (hotspots) identified by the community that should be subject to improvement measures. These problem areas are also detailed in section 11.3 of this plan. The users of pedestrian and cycle routes include mobility scooters, wheelchair and electric pedal cycles.

Getting Around Policy 1 (GAP1)

Provide pedestrian, cycle and mobility scooter access to the town centre from new developments

New development shall provide for ease of accessibility for walking and cycling with routes through and within the development where appropriate that will facilitate access to the town centre, schools and adjacent residential areas. Wherever possible, the provision of pedestrian crossings and cycle routes related to a particular development shall be linked up to existing routes. Development which would prejudice the implementation of these principles will not be permitted. Where appropriate the design principles set out in Manual for Streets 1&2 with Shared Space street design shall be expected to be applied and wherever possible extended into the nearby areas.


5.3.2 Getting Around Objective 2 (GAO2) Improve the town centre spine from the station through to the war memorial, making it pedestrian friendly and more accessible to cyclists, thus enhancing its overall vitality Comments from consultations and meetings with various local groups indicated the need to create a more pedestrian-friendly and more ‘active’ town centre. The Market Square should be flexible to enable its use for community activities and the east-west spine of the town should become much more pedestrian friendly and conducive for cyclists. The ambient speed of traffic also needs to be reduced and the control/management of on-street car parking improved. Furthermore, Lavant Street could be significantly enhanced, thus greatly improving the first impression of the town as people arrive at the station. The Square area, including the High Street could also benefit from better design and thus encourage more active uses of the areas surrounding the Square. Policy GAP4 (Aspirational Policy – see Annex D) therefore sets out an innovative proposal to create a ‘shared space’ style of street environment starting at the station and reaching all the way to the war memorial. This proposal is explained further in section 11.5.1 where the shared space street design concept is covered in more detail and pedestrian/cycle priority streets are highlighted. The key points are illustrated in a number of artist’s impressions. At the same time, we will work towards achieving an improved town transport focus for the station area – a transport hub at the station (including a much improved forecourt) will be sought to bring together a focal point for various transport modes and provide an integral information source for visitors and residents. This proposal has been discussed and developed during the planning process using design workshops and input from the community. It has also been discussed with Hampshire County Council Highways department who expressed their support in principle. Liaison with HCC, the SDNPA and EHDC will be required to bring forward any detailed design proposals.

5.3.3 Getting Around Objective 3 (GAO3) Improve both the management and provision of parking throughout the town There was strong feedback from the community that parking is a problem in the town. However, this is not a simple problem and there were a range of issues. Some people felt that parking provision in the town centre was insufficient, whilst other areas suffered from commuters and town centre workers parking in residential areas near the town centre. It is far from clear that the town is currently lacking in parking capacity as many of the town’s less used car parks are not full even at peak times. So we must encourage people to make better use of the car parks we already have. However, with over 700 new homes and increasing visitor numbers, it is reasonable for us to assume that we will need to increase the town’s parking capacity at some point over the next 15 years. To achieve this, there was general support for retaining the central car park as a level surface with any possible multi-level parking being at the station. However, several alternatives for multi-level parking were also proposed with the north side of the Tesco supermarket site being the next most favoured option. We also need to look at both on-street parking control and clarity of signage to users of the parking zone, plus parking costs to ensure that they are meeting the needs of the community, town centre workers and visitors.


This plan therefore sets out a strategy to aid parking throughout the town: 1. Ensure that all new developments have adequate off-road parking. This is mandated in

housing policy HP8.

2. Provide a larger town centre on-street car parking control zone with better clarity for users, more blue badge spaces and assess the underuse of parking areas. The on-street car parking zone is currently poorly signed and subject to misunderstanding. Clear signage, designation and delineation of car parking bay areas without yellow lining is required to assist users. This will be achieved via policy GAP7 (Aspirational Policy – see Annex D).

3. Increase the parking capacity within the town. This will be achieved by permitting multi-level parking at the station and also, where it is proven necessary, on the northern Tesco car park. More cycle parking provision is also needed to encourage this mode of transport and to meet existing demands. This is embodied in Policy GAP5.

4. Encourage people who drive to the town to park at the station, Tesco or Festival Hall car parks. These three car parks are best described as ‘interceptor’ car parks as they have the potential to capture vehicles before they enter the town centre (see Figure 10 in section 11.4). To work effectively, new accesses will need to be created – off the Causeway or Hylton Road for the Tesco car park and off Tor Way for the Festival Hall car park. This will be achieved by policy GAP6 and by the sign and design improvements detailed in policy GAP7 (Aspirational Policy – see Annex D).

5. Encourage the creation of residents’ parking zones in all areas adjacent to the town centre and station. This will prevent commuters and town centre employees from occupying residents’ parking areas. This will be encouraged by policy GAP8 (Aspirational Policy – see Annex D).

6. Work with EHDC and Network Rail and others to provide preferential parking rates - for town centre workers at the station and/or the Tesco car parks. This will be achieved by policy GAP8 (Aspirational Policy – see Annex D).

Policy GAP5 conforms to: Hampshire County Council (HCC) East Hampshire District Transport Statement 2012, policy objectives B2 and D9


Provide multi-level car parking at the Railway Station and north side of the Tesco car park

Proposals for increasing the car parking capacity in key demand areas within the town will be approved by the creation of multi-level parking at the station. In order to achieve this it will be expected that development opportunities will be considered to help its funding if promoted by Network Rail. Any development will be expected to be of a high design standard encompassing pedestrian access that straddles the railway line.

Planning permission will be also granted for multi-level car park provision, if needed, at the existing Tesco north site accessed off The Causeway or Hylton Road.

Any development proposals in the vicinity of two sites must not prejudice the future development of the car parks as indicated.


Policy GAP6 conforms to: Hampshire County Council (HCC) East Hampshire District Transport Statement 2012, policy objective B2

These improvements will be subject to the consent of the Highway Authority to assist the Festival Hall car park to act as an interceptor car park for the town centre and also enable new development to take place on the north side of Heath Road to reinforce the street frontage and bridge the existing gap created by the west car park entrance. This will enable the adjustment of the cycle route along Tor Way to provide direct access to the Festival Hall and Heath Road.

5.3.4 Getting Around Objective 4 (GAO4)

Encourage sustainable travel including local public transport and street environments that significantly reduce the impact of traffic on the town’s community life Several comments were received on the need for better public transport and the need to consider modes of transport other than the car. This objective, alongside the other objectives and policies above, seeks to reduce reliance on the car by making walking and cycling attractive. The provision of local public transport can also help reduce the impact of the car on communities, aid reduction in street pollution, improve air quality and result in safer streets by reducing traffic speed in residential areas. New developments should ideally be reasonably close to the town centre, about 15 minutes walk away or a short cycle ride option. This will help reinforce the compactness of the town in line with the plan’s vision and, in turn, it will help make streets en-route to the town more active, encourage walkers and cyclists to use them and help reduce car travel. This objective is embodied in policy GAP9 (Aspirational Policy - See Annex D).


Create access to Festival Hall car park off Tor Way

Support will be given to a new access to the Festival Hall car park off Tor Way, including associated traffic calming measures to reduce traffic speed in Tor Way and associated adjustments at Moggs Mead.

Any development applications for the Festival Hall area will be refused if they prejudice future abilities to achieve these revised access arrangements.


6 Community

6.1 Background The population of Petersfield has a diverse age range with a higher than average older population which could be attributed to the higher than average life expectancy in Petersfield (78.1 years for males compared to 76.2 for England). It could also result from older generations retiring to Petersfield to take advantage of local services and facilities. Petersfield has a very active community and voluntary sector. There is an extensive range of clubs, societies and organisations operating in the town. These clubs and societies provide opportunities for residents and visitors to engage in a broad range of activities. Petersfield is well provided for in most aspects of social and cultural infrastructure and enjoys a rich mix of popular cultural events such as the regular seasonal festivals, a music festival, beer festival as well as a constant stream of theatrical productions. The Petersfield Community Centre, Festival Hall and other smaller community halls and buildings offer spaces for the range of community groups operating in Petersfield. Petersfield also benefits from a public library, mobile libraries, post office, local museum and the Flora Twort gallery. Older generations are generally well catered for in terms of clubs and societies; however, there is a shortage of provision of facilities for young people. The town has a number of active religious groups which are jointly represented by the Petersfield Area Churches Together (PACT) organisation. Petersfield is relatively well catered for in sports pitches and facilities. The 2008 playing pitch strategy identified that there is a slight under supply of hockey pitches with an adequate supply of pitches for football, cricket and rugby union. The study also predicts an under supply of junior and senior football provision by 2017 which is already very evident when large football tournaments take place at the Penns Place sports pitch facility. The Taro Leisure Centre and Herne Farm Leisure Centre provide access to a range of sports facilities including swimming, sports hall, squash, gym and fitness suite. Petersfield also has an active Cricket Club, Rugby Club, two football clubs and two golf courses amongst other active sports clubs. Residents of Petersfield have a strong interest in influencing the future growth of the town. This is highlighted by the fact that the community has been actively engaged in the development of the Town Design Statement and the Market Town Health Check (Petersfield Tomorrow). There are also a number of resident associations and societies, such as the Petersfield Society and the Round Table, which are actively involved in public life.

6.2 Community feedback Community feedback in relation to community facilities and services focused on maintaining the existing provision of infrastructure as well as expanding and improving these facilities where viable. The other key area of feedback has been in relation to sports and recreation space. The vast majority of feedback from the community has highlighted the importance placed on informal recreation grounds, sports pitches and particularly the provision of a sports hub at Penns Place, located adjacent to the existing Taro Leisure Centre. Specific comments received at the October 2013 Options event and May 2014 Big Plan events include:

Petersfield Spring Festival, 2014 Photograph courtesy Henry Ascoli, Life in Petersfield


There is a need for a central community hub that could provide a venue capable of

accommodating a variety of large events (approximately 500 people)

The Petersfield Community Centre is very dated, needs improving, more rooms are required

Relocate the Love Lane Community Centre to Love Lane recreation ground and provide a

larger more modern building

The Taro Leisure Centre needs updating

Keep playing fields at Penns Place and enlarge to provide for the future

More should be done to help the 13-16 year olds socially (provision of activities and facilities)

The preservation of existing sports facilities in the town

Protecting existing recreation areas, play areas and informal open and green spaces

Ensure there is appropriate accommodation available for the provision of youth services and

activities such as The King’s Arms

The Festival Hall should be used entirely for community related uses

Tourist Information Centre to be enhanced and more interactive

6.3 Community objectives and policies


CO1

Ensure an adequate provision and mix of community facilities to support the diverse range of users in Petersfield

CP1

Maintain and enhance existing community and education facilities

CP2

Provide a new Community Centre

CP3

Overall increase of community facility provision

CO2

Ensure adequate provision of sport and recreation facilities, to include an adequate provision of built sport facilities and adequate supply of sports pitches and informal recreation areas to meet the needs of local people

CP4

Provide appropriate mix of sports and recreation facilities

CO3

Meaningful involvement and engagement of the wider community in matters relating to the town's development

CP5

Encourage and promote community involvement and engagement


6.3.1 Community Objective 1 (CO1)

Ensure an adequate provision and mix of community facilities to support the diverse range of users in Petersfield The Government is aiming to create strong, vibrant and healthy communities. These communities should be able to access local services which reflect community needs and to achieve this Local Plans and Neighbourhood Plans should ensure the right mix of community facilities. Paragraph 28 of the National Planning Policy Framework highlights the importance for neighbourhood plans to promote the retention and development of local services and community facilities. The East Hampshire Joint Core Strategy identifies the Market Town of Petersfield as a centre for the provision of these vital services not only for Petersfield but for communities around Petersfield. The South Downs National Park Partnership Management Plan, Policy 49, supports this objective as it states that maintaining and improving access to a range of essential community services and facilities is a priority for the towns and villages in the National Park. Petersfield’s population is similar to most rural communities in South East England, the most common attribute is the higher proportion of retired people when compared to the proportions in the rest of England. In Petersfield, 21.5% of people are aged over 65 compared to an average of 16.5% for towns and villages across England. This could be attributed to the higher than average life expectancy or the fact that Petersfield is an attractive place for retired people due to the diverse range of facilities and services it can offer. There is therefore a need to satisfy the demands of the higher age range which extends well into the late 70s and early 80s. Community feedback highlighted concerns that the additional new homes allocated to Petersfield would put undue pressure on existing healthcare services and facilities for older people. The PNP has recognised this concern and there are a number of allocations for the provision of supported living and care homes to meet the needs of an ageing population. In terms of more traditional health care provision (doctors’ surgeries) discussions with Public Health England and Local GP practices has identified that there is currently adequate accommodation for additional GPs so the PNP is not required to allocate land for further health care facilities, as existing facilities have capacity to accommodate more GPs if necessary. There is also a need to mitigate against the current decline in provision of youth services. The need to upgrade community facilities has already been identified (2006 Town and Parish Survey, East Hampshire District Council, Leisure and Built Facilities Strategy 2012 – 2026) and additional community buildings are required. With an increasing population as a result of 700 new homes, the community was keen to ensure that education facilities should keep pace with demand. Having looked at the current provision, the secondary (The Petersfield School) and junior (Herne Junior) schools have sufficient capacity (or room to expand) to meet demand over the lifetime of the plan. The plan allocates land around The Petersfield School, Herne Junior and Churcher's College for educational use to allow for expansion of education provision. A common theme amongst community feedback in the October 2013 options event was for a request for a central community hub that could provide a venue capable of accommodating a variety of large events (approximately 500 people). Meeting this need will become crucial as the population of the town increases.


There are three policies, CP1, CP2 and CP3, which guide development to achieve this objective. These policies identify existing facilities that require investment, allocate land for a new community centre and CP3 is a general policy to ensure no essential community facilities are lost as a result of other forms of development. CP3 may result in developer contributions either through a planning obligation or Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). In some cases on-site provision of facilities will be required.

Table 5 - Community facilities

Policy CP1 conforms to: NPPF paragraphs 69 and 70. JCS Policies: CP16 (Protection and Provision of Social Infrastructure) and CP8 (Town and Village Facilities and Services)

Community Policy 1 (CP1)

Maintain and enhance existing Community and Education Facilities

The following sites shown in Table 5 are identified as important community facilities to be retained, enhanced or developed in accordance with the corresponding description to ensure a range of quality, accessible and safe facilities that meet the diverse needs of the community.

Ref Site Name Description

C1 Festival Hall whole site, including the Open Air Swimming Pool

This is a community site. However, the western part is a priority for enhancement with scope for careful mixed use (residential/employment) as shown in section 11.5.5 of this Plan. Any development of this site must respect the current status and possible future development of the Festival Hall as a performance venue, as well as enhancing the overall character of the area.

This area is also considered to be a suitable location for a town-centre hotel

C2 Former Police Station off St Peter's Road

C3 Avenue Pavilion and playing field

C4 Herne Junior School Reserved to allow for the expansion of education provision

C5 Love Lane Recreational Ground Priority for enhancement

C6 Churcher's College Playing Fields

C7 The Petersfield School

C8 Land at Buckmore Stables 0.4 ha to be allocated for a cemetery as an alternative to site C9

C9 Land to the north east of Reservoir Lane

0.4 ha to be allocated for a cemetery as an alternative to site C8

C10 Penns Place Sports Hub including Taro Leisure Centre

Priority for enhancement


Policy CP2 conforms to: NPPF paragraphs 37, 69 and 70. JCS Policies CP16 (Protection and Provision of Social Infrastructure) and CP8 (Town and Village Facilities and Services)

Policy CP3 conforms to: NPPF paragraphs 69, 70, 72. JCS Policies CP16 (Protection and Provision of Social Infrastructure) and CP8 (Town and Village Facilities and Services)


Ensure adequate provision of sport and recreation facilities. To include an adequate provision of built sport facilities and adequate supply of sports pitches and informal recreation areas to meet the needs of local people Promoting healthy lifestyles and reducing the impact of obesity is a prime objective for National Government and this is reflected in Government’s National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). Paragraph 28 of the NPPF clearly states that Neighbourhood Plans should ‘promote the retention and development of local services and community facilities in villages, such as local shops, meeting places, sports venues, cultural buildings, public houses and places of worship’. The NPPF also makes reference to the adequate provision of sport and recreation facilities in paragraphs 70 and paragraph 74. The South Downs National Park’s Special Qualities also identify a need to protect and enhance opportunities for recreation activity in the National Park. This is underpinned by the National Park’s second purpose, to promote opportunities for the understanding and enjoyment of the Park’s special qualities. The 2011 census states that the population of Petersfield is generally healthy and active when compared to statistics for East Hampshire and England. To maintain this relatively good health and the high levels of activity there is a need to maintain and enhance the provision of sports and recreation facilities. Currently, there is a shortage of good quality external and internal sports and recreation facilities (East Hampshire District Council, Leisure and Built Facilities Strategy 2012 – 2026).


Provide a new Community Centre

Planning permission will be granted for a new Community Centre within Love Lane Recreation Area which will include facilities suitable for young people.


Overall increase of community and education facility provision

New residential developments of the sites allocated in Policy H1 will be expected to provide community facilities appropriate to the scale of the development to meet the needs created by the development or to make a financial contribution to the enhancement of existing facilities. Development which results in the loss of a community facility will only be permitted where it can be demonstrated that alternative facilities of equal or better quality and quantity can be provided in an equally accessible location in the Petersfield area. The new provision must be available for use prior to the loss of existing provision.


For the younger generation, schools and sports clubs are very well attended. Access to a youth centre is limited and there is a demand for other activities to be available in Petersfield to avoid the need to travel to either Guildford or Portsmouth. To meet the needs of the younger generation and to ensure the ageing population is encouraged to keep well and active, sport and recreation facility provision needs to be increased and existing facilities upgraded. To ensure a strong sense of community, this needs to be addressed before the population increases. There is a single policy to achieve this objective. Policy CP4 states that no loss in sports pitch or facility will be allowed unless there is clear evidence to support the fact that this is appropriate for the town and its population. If alternative facilities are to be provided they should conform to Sport England Design Guidance5.

Policy CP4 conforms to: NPPF paragraphs 73 and 74. JCS Policies CP17 (Protection of Open Space Sport and Recreation and Built Facilities) and CP18 (Provision of Open Space Sport and Recreation and Built Facilities)


Meaningful involvement and engagement of the wider community in matters relating to the town's development

It is important for the local community to have a say in the development of their market town. Through meaningful involvement and engagement the process can ensure the community has a good understanding of neighbourhood planning and the issues connected with it. Through participation in the decision-making process the plans will be shaped by the community. This approach can also be used to manage expectation to ensure the community has a clear understanding of what neighbourhood planning is and what it can and cannot do. The national ‘Place Survey’, collected by all local authorities in 2008 identified that residents in East Hampshire are generally more active in terms of civic participation when compared to statistics for Hampshire and England. The resident population of Petersfield has a strong history of participation in matters concerning the future development of the town. This is apparent in reviewing the Petersfield Town Design Statement, a document produced to conserve and enhance the built environment of the town.

5 https://www.sportengland.org/facilities-planning/tools-guidance/design-and-cost-guidance/


Provide appropriate mix of sports and recreation facilities

Development that results in the loss of a sport, recreation or play facility will only be permitted where:

- it can be demonstrated that alternative facilities of equal or better quality and quantity can be provided in an equally accessible location within the Petersfield area; or

- an assessment has been undertaken which shows that the sport, recreation or play facility is surplus to requirements; or

- the development is for alternative sports, recreation or play provision, the need for which clearly outweigh the loss.

The new provision must be available for use prior to the loss of existing provision

https://www.sportengland.org/facilities-planning/tools-guidance/design-and-cost-guidance/


The importance of ‘local voices’ being heard in decision-making has been made very clear in community feedback throughout the development of the Neighbourhood Plan. Residents of Petersfield stated that any development occurring in Petersfield should, as a minimum, include meaningful involvement and engagement with residents in close proximity to development proposals but efforts should also be made to engage with the entire community to understand their views and aspirations of proposals. Paragraph 188 of the National Planning Policy Framework supports this approach, clearly stating that ‘early engagement has significant potential to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the planning application system for all parties’. Policy CP5 provides further detail to Paragraph 188 of the NPPF to set out in more detail what is expected of developers proposing schemes in Petersfield in relation to community engagement. This policy will ensure that developers carry out meaningful engagement and will be asked to provide details of how this feedback is being incorporated into any development proposals.

Policy CP5 conforms to: NPPF paragraphs 188. JCS Policies CP10 (Spatial Strategy for Housing) which sets out the requirement for developers to understand community aspirations in the allocation of housing and other facilities


Encourage and promote community involvement and engagement

Development proposals which are submitted for sites allocated in this Plan must demonstrate that they have provided opportunities for residents of Petersfield to comment on proposals before any planning application is submitted. Planning applications shall be accompanied by a Statement of Community Involvement which details the methods used to engage the wider community and the results of these engagement activities, including any developer response to the feedback.


7 The Natural Environment

7.1 Background The Joint Core Strategy recognises the need to protect and enhance the District’s high quality natural environment and its green infrastructure. Petersfield has significant areas of open space; in particular the Heath provides character and ambience, with nature conservation, archaeological and recreational features. Green corridors, footpaths and spaces link the town to the countryside from all directions: Tilmore Farm to the north-west; Lords Farm to the north; Sheet Common to the north east; the River Rother and its nature reserve to the east; the Heath in the south east; the Causeway to the south and Bell Hill to the north-west. These green fingers are an important feature and help retain the rural character of the town. Throughout the town there is substantial tree cover, with many prominent trees in key locations such as gardens and parks. Landscaping schemes for car parks, the town centre and residential areas such as Herne Farm and Ramshill have provided additional tree cover as the town has developed. The River Rother and its tributaries provide a network of brooks and streams that flow through the centre of the town, including its two main car parks. In parts of the town, they have been culverted, but the Tilmore Brook which flows through the Herne Farm Estate, has been well landscaped and a footpath leads to Penns Place and the adjacent playing fields. Petersfield is located within a complex, varied and bio-diverse landscape owing its position to a river valley situated between the chalk ridge of the South Downs and the greensand geology to the north. These are all important qualities that need to be taken into account when developments are being considered.

7.2 Community feedback The main comments raised by local people include:

Recognising that green infrastructure linking town to countryside is essential

Ensuring that long distance footpaths, cycle routes, woodlands and rivers are accessible to the town’s residents

Providing additional open spaces within new developments

Making the most of existing green spaces such as the Heath

Preserving and enhancing open spaces within developments to ensure public access

Retaining Penns Place and the adjacent playing fields as a recreational and leisure resource for the town and as a safe and secure area for young people

Improving existing open spaces with more variety, such as wild flower planting


7.3 Natural Environment objectives and policies


NEO1

A green infrastructure network will be provided, developed and enhanced linking the town to the surrounding countryside

NEP1

The green Infrastructure network to be developed and linked to the surrounding countryside

NEP2

Preserving and enhancing open space within existing developments

NEO2

Protect key areas of the town for their landscape, ecological, recreational and historic value

NEP3

Developments that detract from the landscape, archaeological, ecological or history value of the Heath will not be permitted

NEP4

Development which detracts from the landscape, nature conservation status and setting of the Rotherlands Nature Reserve will not be permitted

NEO3

Protect and enhance the landscape

NEP5

Developments to contribute positively to the landscape

NEO4

Develop access and enhance links to the surrounding countryside for walking and cycling

NEP6

Links to the countryside

NEO5

Encourage and enhance greater biodiversity

NEP7

Biodiversity, trees and woodlands

NEO6

Reduce flooding risk and enhance waterways

NEP8

Flooding risk and waterway enhancement


7.3.1 Natural Environment Objective 1 (NEO1)

A Green infrastructure network will be provided, developed and enhanced, linking the town to the surrounding countryside Section 11.1 of this plan identifies sites for residential development and also allocates areas that must be provided as public open space. This overall spatial vision for Petersfield provides for a connected network of new and existing green space, linking with the surrounding countryside. Green infrastructure goes beyond the provision of open space; it is the identification and planning of a multi-functional network of features to provide sustainable transport, biodiversity, ecosystem services, recreational spaces and climate change adaptation based on the principles of connectivity. New housing development gives the opportunity to create new public open space for the benefit of both new and existing residents. In doing so it is important that features rich in biodiversity, such as hedgerows, are retained and can be satisfactorily managed as part of the development. Policy NEP1 therefore requires that the green infrastructure defined in section 11.1 is maintained and enhanced by the provision of new green space within any new development. Policy NEP2 goes on to list the specific areas of green space that are designated in this plan and must therefore be preserved and enhanced.

Policy NEP1 conforms to: JCS Policy, CP16, CP28. NPPF paragraphs 7, 69, 70, 73, 74, 75 and 99

Natural Environment Policy 1 (NEP1)

The network of green Infrastructure and open spaces will be developed and linked to the surrounding countryside for community use and enjoyment

The network of green infrastructure and open spaces identified in Policy NEP2 of this Plan and as shown in Figure 7 will be linked to the surrounding countryside and developed, conserved and enhanced for community use and enjoyment. Wildlife corridors and priority habitats will be recognised and protected, where possible, from development proposals that would result in the loss of such identified green spaces or that results in any harm to their character, setting, accessibility, appearance, general quality or amenity value. Proposals will only be permitted if the community would gain equivalent benefit from the provision of suitable replacement green infrastructure.

New open spaces should be created in residential areas either through on-site or off-site provision. They should, where possible, connect and enhance the existing network within Petersfield. Provision of open space should be in advance of relevant developments being occupied and should also be accessible to people with disabilities.

Green infrastructure includes the external environment and how it provides ecosystem services. For example in the town centre an alternative to open space provision could be green roofs, rain gardens or green walls. These may be suitable alternatives which provide connectivity and help alleviate flood risk.


Table 6 - Green space allocations

Policy NEP2 conforms to: JCS Policy CP20, CP21, CP28. NPPF paragraphs 76, 77,115

7.3.2 Natural Environment Objective 2 (NEO2) Protect key areas of the town for their landscape, ecological, recreational and historic value

The Heath is recognised as a unique asset for the town - it has been a traditional recreational area for such activities as the Taro Fair, originally for livestock but now a funfair. Sporting activities such as golf, cricket, hockey and football have been played since Victorian times. It is used for dog-walking, picnicking and by children for play, is crossed by two rights of way, contains a children’s play area and a newly refurbished refreshment kiosk. With its shallow pond of nearly 9 hectares it is popular for boating and fishing. It is classed as a Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC) as it has important priority habitats including Lowland Acid Grassland, Lowland Heathland and several important plant species such as Chamomile, Mossy Stonecrop and Bulbous Meadow-Grass present. It is also an important archaeological site with about 21 prehistoric burial mounds, the largest concentration of Bronze Age round barrows in the area and a Scheduled Ancient Monument. Policy NEP3 therefore prohibits any development which would damage or detract from the Heath and its immediate vicinity.


Preserving and enhancing the green network and open spaces

The green network and the open spaces detailed in Table 6 and shown in Figure 7 are designated as Local Green Space in accordance with NPPF paragraphs 76-77 and will be preserved and enhanced for public access and informal recreational use.

Essential utility infrastructure will be permitted, where the benefit will outweigh any harm, or it can be demonstrated that there are no reasonable alternatives available.

Ref Site Name Size (ha)

Comments

G1 The Heath 36.31

G2 Green Space east of Causeway Farm 21.98 New allocation

G3 Tilmore Brook green finger 6.25 New allocation

G4 Green Space north of Buckmore Farm 2.78 New allocation

G5 Merritts Meadow 2.34 New allocation

G6 Land east of Tilmore Road 2.16 New allocation

G7 Bell Hill Recreation Ground 2.28

G8 Land either side of Borough Hill 1.26

G9 Borough Hill Recreation Ground & land adjoining railway line 1.00

G10 Woods Meadow (Tilmore recreation ground) 0.61

G11 Recreation Ground south of Paddock Way 0.79

G12 Rotherlands Nature Reserve 7.3 New allocation

G13 Land south of Borough Road 4.58 New allocation


Policy NEP3 conforms to: JCS Policy CP17, CP20, CP21. NPPF paragraphs 76, 77,115 The land along the River Rother and Tilmore Brook was formerly part of Penns Farm and would have been a series of grazed meadows, fens, brooks, ponds and wet woodlands. Over the years it became unmanaged and a wilderness until it was adopted by local residents who formed the Rotherlands Conservation Group in 2000. Since then, it has been restored as a natural habitat, is a haven for wildlife and provides a well used riverside walk for the public. It is regularly managed and is of considerable local ecological interest. It was designated a Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC) in 2001 and granted status as a Local Nature Reserve in 2004. The land supports a wide range of riverside habitats including:

• Running waters and adjacent banks • Drier meadow • Wetter meadow • Woody scrub and brambles • Wet woodland and alder/willow • Drier woodland • Ancient boundary vegetation

Whilst no rare or scarce plant species have been recorded, a number are particular to the region. However, a wide range of mammals, birds and invertebrates have been recorded by the Conservation Group and are listed on their website http://www.rotherlands.co.uk. A management plan for the Reserve is in place until 2017. The area is an important local green space within the town and needs to be protected as a wildlife and bio-diverse corridor linking to the open countryside to the east. It provides flood plains along the river banks and is a valuable recreation resource for the local community. As a Site for Nature Conservation and a Local Nature Reserve, it could be vulnerable to the impact of development on its riverside habitats and wildlife. Policy NEP4 therefore seeks to protect and enhance its status as a Nature Reserve and its bio-diversity.

Policy NEP4 conforms to: JCS Policy CP21. NPPF paragraphs 109,114,115,117,118


Development which damages or adversely affects the Rotherlands Nature Reserve will not be permitted

Development in proximity to the Rotherlands Nature Reserve will be required to protect and enhance the Reserve, as shown in Figure 7 and detailed in Table 6. Any proposals which detract from the landscape, nature conservation status and setting of the Reserve will not be permitted.


Development which detracts from the landscape, archaeological, ecological or history value of the Heath will not be permitted

Development which would detract from the landscape, archaeological, ecological or historic value of the Heath and its townscape setting will not be permitted. Proposals that would enhance the accessibility, understanding or enjoyment of the biodiversity assets of the Heath will be approved provided its distinctive character, history, biodiversity and recreational value is retained.

http://www.rotherlands.co.uk/


7.3.3 Natural Environment Objective 3 (NEO3) Protect and enhance the landscape The importance of the setting of Petersfield is recognised in the series of landscape studies and assessments undertaken by the South Downs National Park and the East Hampshire District Council for the Joint Core Strategy and the previous local plan. The most recent is the South Downs Integrated Landscape Character Assessment (SDILCA) 2011, which provides detailed information about the landscape of the National Park. It shows how Petersfield is located within a sensitive landscape owing to its position within a river valley, situated between the chalk ridge of the South Downs and the greensand geology to the north. These are important qualities that need to be taken into account when developments are being considered to ensure that the sensitivity of the landscape is not compromised and that any changes do not have significant impact on the character and environment of the town. Policy NEP5 therefore requires that the landscape impact of all new development is carefully assessed and mandates that development must contribute positively to the town’s setting within the National Park. Development appraisals in support of this policy should consider the sensitivity and robustness of the landscape to accept change without significant effects on its key features and attributes. They should include in the assessment the impact on views from the South Downs Way and the Hangers Way.

Policy NEP5 conforms to: JCS Policy CP19, CP20, CP21, CP23, CP27. NPPF paragraphs 109,115


Protecting and enhancing Petersfield’s setting in its environment

All new development that affects the setting of the town within its environment must make a positive contribution and ensure that the sensitivity of its landscape quality is recognised and enhanced.


7.3.4 Natural Environment Objective 4 (NEO4) Develop access and enhance links to the surrounding countryside for walking and cycling

The people of Petersfield emphasised the importance of the walking and cycling links to the countryside being maintained and enhanced. Both activities are popular with local residents and contribute to health and fitness.

Walking provides both exercise and the possibility of exploring the immediate environment of the town and countryside. Petersfield’s two key long-distant footpaths are the Hangers Way (Alton in the north and Queen Elizabeth Country Park in the south) where it joins the South Downs Way and the Serpents Trail which links the Heath to Liphook, Haslemere, Midhurst and Petworth.

The Shipwrights Way is a new long distance route for walkers, cyclists and where possible, horse riders and people with disabilities. This links Alice Holt Forest in the north via Petersfield to the Queen Elizabeth Country Park, Hayling Island via ferry to Eastney and finishing at the Portsmouth Historic Dockyard in the south.

There is no suitable east/west cycle link and the feasibility of the former Petersfield to Midhurst Railway line being used for cycling purposes is currently being investigated by SDNPA and local cycle groups. If it proved a worthwhile project then the route would need to be developed and protected. A possible link to Stroud is also being investigated.

Within the town, footpaths and shopping lanes provide pedestrian access to all parts and are an important attractive resource for residents and visitors. There are two published town trails – A Petersfield Perambulation, produced by the Petersfield Area Historical Society in 1996 and the Petersfield Blue Plaque Trail, produced by Petersfield Heritage in 2008, both of which provide information about historic buildings in the town. Policy NEP6 therefore requires existing footpath and cycling links to be protected and enhanced as part of Petersfield’s green infrastructure network. The policy also encourages the provision of new links in association with voluntary bodies and statutory agencies.

Policy NEP6 conforms to: JCS Policy CP28 and CP31. NPPF paragraphs 69, 75, 77, 115


Links to the countryside

All new developments which lie on or adjacent to the footpath and cycling links identified in Figure 9 and, in particular, the Hangers Way, Serpents Trail and Shipwrights Way, should not prejudice the retention and enhancement of these routes and should contribute to new links as appropriate.


7.3.5 Natural Environment Objective 5 (NEO5) Encourage and enhance greater biodiversity

The Petersfield Local Biodiversity Action Plan (LBAP) highlights the contribution that local community based action can make towards protecting and conserving the natural environment. It identifies the Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation including road verges and Protected Priority habitat types relevant to Petersfield such as Floodplains, Dry Acid Grassland, Lowland Heathland, types of Woodland, Pastures and Wildlife Corridors. A range of species are to be found in the town - bats, hedgehogs, voles, dormice, stag beetles, reptiles, fish, crayfish, bees, butterflies, moths and birds together with plants and trees. The LBAP notes the likely threats and sets out a range of action plans for designated sites, priority and broad habitats. It recommends building new, native habitats and the improvement of existing habitats including gardens, as well as education and raising of awareness together with community involvement. Policy NEP6 therefore seeks to assist the implementation of the LBAP and ensure that developments complement or enhance biodiversity in the town. This policy also encourages members of the community to become involved in the care and maintenance of green spaces within the town.

Policy NEP7 conforms to: JCS Policy CP21. NPPF paragraphs 76, 77, 115, 118


Biodiversity, trees and woodlands

Proposals which result in a loss of biodiversity will not normally be permitted. A sequential approach to the impact of development on biodiversity should be applied as follows:

1) harm will be avoided;

2) if it cannot be avoided (that is, through locating development on an alternative site with less harmful impacts) then

3) the impact of development should be adequately mitigated.

Only if both 1) and 2) are demonstrated to be unachievable, then the impact should be compensated for to ensure no net loss.

Proposals should demonstrate how existing biodiversity corridors and networks are retained and enhanced. Development that damages or results in the loss of ancient trees or trees of good arboricultural and amenity value will not normally be permitted. Proposals should be designed to retain ancient trees or trees of arboricultural and amenity value. Such proposals should be accompanied by a tree survey that establishes the health and longevity of any affected trees in accordance with BS5837 Trees in relation to Design, Demolition and Construction 2012.9 or equivalent document. Open spaces will be expected to be adopted by the Town Council and the community will be encouraged to participate in their creation and maintenance through voluntary involvement. This will promote greater biodiversity and opportunities for volunteering, healthy lifestyles and skills training.


7.3.6 Natural Environment Objective 6 (NEO6) Reduce flooding risk and enhance waterways

Waterways, or ‘blue corridors’, are at the heart of the town and should be recognised for their contribution to the biodiversity and character of the townscape and their relationship with burgage plots in the town centre. The River Rother and its tributaries provide water for industries and give the town an unusual network of brooks and streams which flow through the centre of the town and the two central car parks where they are culverted. In parts of the town centre, the streams are hidden and unkempt. However, the Tilmore Brook, which flows through the Herne Farm estate, has been well landscaped and a footpath leads to the River Rother. The Criddell Stream passes through meadows between Borough Road, Grange Road, The Petersfield School and the Tesco supermarket.

However, flooding is a potential problem and in 2007, EHDC commissioned Halcrow to produce a Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA) which provides an overview of the methodology, assumptions, uncertainties, tasks undertaken and links to the wider sustainability appraisal process. It provides policy recommendations and guidance for the application of the ‘Sequential Test’, the preparation of Flood Risk Assessments and the use of sustainable drainage systems within the East Hampshire District. The main message of the Flood Risk Assessment is that the floodplain is one of the most important measures against flood risk and should be protected or, where possible, increased. Policy NEP8 therefore requires that new development should assess and mitigate any increase in flood risk. Where possible, such flood protection measures should contribute to the planned green infrastructure network.

Policy NEP8 conforms to: JCS Policy CP25, CP26, CP28. NPPF paragraphs 99, 100, 109, 114, 115


Flooding risk and waterway enhancement

All developments in areas liable to flooding must adequately address potential flooding risk in accordance with advice in the NPPF and drainage issues and development adjacent to waterways should, where appropriate, contribute to their enhancement as part of the green infrastructure network.


8 Business

8.1 A business profile of the town

Petersfield’s population is around 15,000 and has increased by 12.6% over the last 10 years. 42% percent of the population of East Hampshire out-commutes for work (5% to London, down from 11% in 2001). There are around 8,400 jobs in Petersfield of which 14.3% are in retail, 10.3% in manufacturing, 10.2% in Healthcare and 10.1% in Business Services. Feedback from our community consultations suggests many residents would prefer to work locally and that opportunities for professional, technical and experienced manual workers are limited. The town needs a broader range of employment opportunities. Between 2001 and 2011 there has been a decline in the working age population (63.7% to 62%) with a particularly large decline amongst young adults, 25-39 (from 19.6% to 15.2%). Feedback suggests that residents would like to see more opportunities for young people in the town. Registered unemployment, based on claimants of Job Seeker’s Allowance (JSA), is relatively low in East Hants (1.5% in February 2013) compared with the national rate of 3.9%. Just over 40% of East Hampshire residents are graduates, compared with 36% nationally. This is reflected in the many high tech, IT and engineering companies clustered in Petersfield (Whitman Laboratories, Neural technologies, Aibel, InSync and others). East Hants has a high proportion of micro businesses with 73% of employers having a turnover of under £250,000, however feedback suggests that the business space currently available in Petersfield is not suitable for these types of businesses. Average house prices in Petersfield are high at £372,844 and are possibly a barrier to recruitment and retention of workplace staff in local businesses resulting in many people who work in Petersfield needing to commute in by car or rail. Start-up assistance is offered currently via East Hants District Council in the form of £500 in the first year of start-up. In addition there is an Enterprise Apprenticeship Grant of up to £2,000 for taking on an apprentice for 2 years. Demand outstrips supply for both schemes. Petersfield is viewed by businesses as a reasonable industrial location benefiting from proximity to the A3, good rail links to London and good labour supply. Demand tends to be from small to medium sized units from local firms that are looking to expand or upgrade and stay within the area and small/micro businesses looking for small flexible units. 3.5% of commercial property is currently vacant in Petersfield; this is below the ideal figure of 10% regarded as the optimum for market efficiency. A shortage of both light industrial and small office units has been identified. It is estimated that there are outstanding requirements for around 55,600 square metres (5.6ha) of commercial floor space in Petersfield including 2 major employers (offering 200 jobs in total). In addition, Buckmore Farm has outline planning permission for 6-10 units (maximum of 5500sqft of floor space) as well as a listed farm building on a total of 2.1ha of land. This land has not been developed as yet.


Much of the industrial space is located on Bedford Road and Frenchmans Road. The appearance of Bedford Road could be improved; in particular the lorry park and the densely packed older style buildings along the southern section as well as signage, landscaping and pavements. Agents say this area needs upgrading/refurbishing and currently is a barrier to attracting businesses. Frenchmans Road, the laundry site and Amey Industrial estate have been assessed as average/poor quality in their ability to meet future employment development needs due to constrained access via residential streets. If required, funding for such a proposal could be financed by public/private partnership with potential sources of central government funding being:

The Local Growth Fund – a 2014 government initiative for capital investment, and/or

The European Regional Growth Fund that is focused on job creation which may be a future source of funding

The South Downs National Park Authority’s statutory purposes of conservation and enhancement of the natural beauty of the area result in particular challenges for businesses. Areas south and west of the centre as well as hills to the north leading to the Hangers have high landscape impacts and, as land used for employment purposes generally has a higher negative landscape impact than housing, it has to be developed extremely sensitively. Mitigating effects (such as green roofs) are expensive for businesses, especially small companies, to absorb. These issues mean that, although there is high demand for businesses to locate in Petersfield because of its good transport links, often it is very difficult to accommodate them.

8.2 Community feedback Overall, people were very supportive of businesses in Petersfield. The community felt that a rich mix of small businesses, particularly from the creative industries, should be a key feature of the town. Discussions with local small businesses and commercial agents suggest that there is a requirement for a small office/enterprise centre (Incubator/SME cluster site) development closer to the town centre. It is felt that an Enterprise Unit containing small units (1,500-2,000 square feet each) in which micro-businesses can rent flexible space with shared facilities such a meeting rooms, café/catering facilities and reception and management services is required. Agents cite Rotherbrook Court on Bedford Road as an example of a high quality small office development and suggested that more of this type should be available but with the caveat that it should be located closer to the town’s amenities such as printers, professional services, station, post office, banks and cafés. Frenchmans Road had been identified by the community as an area in particular need of re-development. A mixed residential and industrial area, it is a loose collection of ageing industrial buildings, some of which are unoccupied. It creates a poor impression as you enter the town and occupies a prime location next to the station that could be better utilized. People felt that the re-development of this area should be a priority.


8.3 Business objectives and policies


BO1

Attract and retain businesses that can provide employment opportunities for local people

BP1

Allocate sites specifically for employment use

BP2

Protect existing employment sites

BP3

Encourage businesses to come to Petersfield

BP4

Promote and enhance workforce skills

BO2

Make better use of available land by supporting the intensification of town-centre industrial sites to transition, where appropriate, to small business and business enterprise facilities

BP5

Redevelopment of the Frenchmans Road

BO3

Support and encourage small businesses, start-ups and creative businesses requiring small workshop spaces

BP6

Support small creative businesses requiring workshop space

BO4

Improve the quality of the existing business infrastructure provision in Bedford Road and the area of Frenchmans Road adjoining the railway line

BP7

Bedford Road improvements


8.3.1 Business Objective 1 (BO1) Attract and retain businesses that can provide employment opportunities for local people The Joint Core Strategy (JCS) requires the provision of about 3ha of new employment land in Petersfield. Policy BP1 and Table 7, set out a new allocation of 3.03ha and also identify existing key employment sites. Detailed design frameworks for the new allocations are included in section 12. The JCS is specific about the housing allocation for Petersfield and considers allocations for adjoining parishes separately. However, the employment land allocation is discussed more generally, with no specific requirements placed on adjoining parishes. By its very nature, employment land, particularly light industrial, is often located around the edge of settlements. In the case of the Petersfield Neighbourhood Plan, the Plan area is heavily constrained by neighbouring parishes and thus many potential employment sites that could support Petersfield are outside the plan area and were therefore not considered as part of the planning process. Whilst this plan is unable to allocate sites in these areas, we note that the May 2014 Petersfield Employment Land Requirement – Final Report by Nathanial Lichfield and Partners, recommended a total new allocation of 6ha of employment land. We therefore believe that there remains unfulfilled demand for employment land over the lifetime of the plan and that there is therefore an opportunity for the future Local Plan to allocate further employment land in the adjoining parishes that would support the Petersfield area as a whole.

Policy BP1 conforms to: NPPF paragraphs 7,9,20 and 28. JCS Policies CP2 (Spatial Strategy), CP3 (New Employment Provision)

Business Policy 1 (BP1)

Allocate sites specifically for employment use

Planning permission will be granted for appropriate new employment development on the sites set out in Table 7 and as detailed in section 11, provided the development complies with the design principles set out in section 12 and meet the requirements of other relevant policies of this Plan and the East Hampshire District Local Plan: Joint Core Strategy. Applications for alternative uses on these sites will not normally be approved except for those town centre sites shown in Table 8.


Table 7 - Employment site allocations Whilst encouraging new employment is important, we must also preserve our existing employment areas if Petersfield is to remain a town where people can both live and work. Policy BP2 therefore states that existing employment sites cannot be used for anything else unless it has been clearly demonstrated that there is no demand for business use.

Policy BP2 conforms to: NPPF paragraphs 7,9,20 and 28. JCS Policy CP4


Protect existing employment sites

Proposals that result in the loss of business floor space whether through change of use or redevelopment will not normally be allowed (except the mixed use sites shown in Table 8) unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority that the premises are no longer suitable for business use and evidence has been submitted that demonstrates that the property has been actively marketed for at least 6 months on realistic market terms and it is shown that there is no prospect of new business occupiers being found

Site Ref.

Site Name Size (ha) Comments

B1 Land north of Buckmore Farm 2.03 New allocation – but with 0.2ha reserved for tree planting/screening (see section 12.10)

B2 Land at The Domes, off Harrier Way 1.10 New allocation – the total area of this site is 1.63ha. However, 0.53ha is currently used for business purposes

B3 Corries main site 0.71 Existing site

B4 Paris House, Frenchmans Road 1.03 Existing site

B5 Warehouse to south of Paris House 0.38 Existing site

B6 Car park off Frenchmans Road 0.10 New allocation

B7 Tews Engineering, off Lavant Street 0.31 Existing site

B8 Land to north of Winchester Road 1.20 Existing site – but not yet developed

B9 Bedford Road employment area 20.66 Existing site

B10 Site off west corner of Swan Street 0.52 Existing site

Total 27.85 Total new allocation is 3.23ha


Should new sites become available for employment in addition to the 3ha we have allocated, we would wish to encourage their development as employment is vital to the town’s future prosperity. Policy BP3 therefore encourages new employment sites to come forward, but ensures that any new employment development is aligned with the principles and vision of this plan.

Policy BP3 conforms to: NPPF paragraphs 7,9,20 and 28. JCS Policies CP2 (Spatial Strategy), CP3 (New Employment Provision), CP5 (Employment and Workforce skills), CP6 (Rural Economy and Enterprise)

Finally, ensuring the people who work in the town have the right skills and training is a key part of our employment strategy. Policy BP4 therefore encourages new development proposals to include provision for workforce skills training (Aspirational Policy – see Annex D).

8.3.1 Business Objective 2 (BO2) Make better use of available land by supporting the intensification of town-centre industrial sites for transition, where appropriate, to small business and business enterprise facilities The community felt that the Frenchmans Road area could offer more to the town and should therefore be a priority for regeneration. There is now a greater demand for better quality small office and serviced office space and the plan therefore proposes that the employment use of this area could be significantly intensified where appropriate. Policy BP5 therefore encourages the redevelopment of the Frenchmans Road area whilst BP6 seeks to establish a business enterprise centre in the town with the Frenchmans Road site as a primary candidate.

Policy BP5 conforms to: NPPF paragraphs 7,9,20 and 28. JCS Policy CP4 (Existing Employment Land) and CP5 (Employment and Workforce skills), Employment Land Review Guidance note 2004 (ODPM)


Encourage businesses to come to Petersfield

Proposals for new business development especially small scale flexible office units and affordable workshops will be approved in appropriate locations subject to compliance with other relevant policies in this Plan and the East Hampshire District Local Plan: Joint Core Strategy.


Redevelopment of the Frenchmans Road area

Proposals for the redevelopment of the Frenchmans Road area as shown in section 11.5.2, and identified as sites B3, B4, B5 and B6 in Figure 7, will be approved provided the development complies with the design principles set out in section 11.5.2 of the plan and meets the requirements of other relevant policies of the Plan and the East Hampshire District Local Plan: Joint Core Strategy.

It is considered that the Frenchmans Road area would be particularly suitable for a Business Enterprise Centre.


8.3.2 Business Objective 3 (BO3) Support and encourage small businesses, start-ups and creative businesses requiring small workshop spaces

Policy BP6 conforms to: NPPF paragraphs 7,9,20 and 28. JCS Policies CP4 (Existing Employment Land), CP5 (Employment and Workforce skills)

8.3.3 Business Objective 4 (BO4)

Improve the quality of the existing business infrastructure provision in Bedford Road and the area of Frenchmans Road adjoining the railway line The Bedford Road employment area is a vital part of the town’s business infrastructure and is situated in an ideal location, close to the A3 and the town centre. However, it is, in places, an unattractive part of the town and also lacks facilities to support the people that work there. It is therefore not attracting businesses to the town in its current form. Policy BP7 therefore seeks to encourage a series of improvements to this part of the town which would attract more businesses to the town.

Policy BP7 conforms to: NPPF paragraphs 7,9,20 and 28. JCS Policy CP4 (Existing Employment Land)


Support small creative businesses requiring workshop space

Proposals for the provision of small units to support affordable workshop space suitable for small businesses (trades/crafts/social enterprises etc) will be approved, particularly within walking distance of the town centre, and should be appropriate to their immediate context.

Proposals for larger employment sites should consider allocating a specific amount of space for this sort of facility.


Bedford Road improvements

Proposals which enable or support a programme of improvements for the Bedford Road employment area will be strongly supported. These improvements should prioritise landscaping, signage, pedestrian access, cycling, parking provision and catering facilities for employees.


9 Retail

9.1 A retail profile of the town The retail heart of the town is the High Street and the Market Square extending to Dragon Street, Chapel Street and Lavant Street. The profile of the shops has changed over the years reflecting the general upheavals in high streets across the country, increased use of the internet for day-to-day items and shopping as a leisure activity. Petersfield has weathered this quite well by offering increased numbers of unique shops that appeal to leisure shoppers at weekends and leisure based services such as beauty, hairdressing and cafés, whilst at the same time retaining the larger chains. This process is likely to continue with standard shops being replaced with quality, niche retail outlets. Many people visit Petersfield for leisure activities and to enjoy its cultural and built heritage (estimated 3.5m day trips to the area annually). As a result, the demand for retail space is currently extremely buoyant with agents reporting a shortage of small units for rent (400-500sq feet). Petersfield is well supplied with supermarkets. The town has a large Tesco, Waitrose, Marks & Spencer and My Local (Nisa) close to the town centre. Within a half-mile of the town centre there are Lidl, Tesco Express and The Cooperative. The JCS suggested the need for an additional 1,366m2 of convenience retail floor space (defined as items required daily such as food and drink, newspapers and non-durable household goods). The arrival of Lidl (944m2) and My Local (488m2) in 2013 has met this requirement. Community feedback also suggested that people felt that Petersfield now had more than enough supermarkets. The majority of visitors to the town centre shops come 2-5 times per week. The main competition is from Chichester, Portsmouth / Southsea and Southampton. Petersfield’s historic centre attracts visitors to enjoy food and drink in attractive and pleasant surroundings. The town is well equipped with pubs, restaurants and cafes, many of which now offer outdoor seating around the Market Square. Festivals, events and specialist markets have helped to promote the concept and the Market Square has proved a great asset to the town which has assisted and improved its retail offer. There are seven pubs, which also serve food, within the town plus many more in the surrounding villages. There is a good mix of quality restaurants as well as numerous cafés and coffee shops. The night-time economy is important with an increased number of restaurants and the popularity of town-centre pubs. There is no evidence to suggest that there is an unfulfilled need at present.


9.2 Community feedback

Feedback from our consultations suggested that although the majority thinks the retail offering in Petersfield is good, more independent speciality shops would improve the retail mix. The community would like to see shops selling DIY/Ironmongers, outdoor equipment/clothing, leather goods, men’s clothes and a fishmonger. Petersfield is marketed as a Historic Market Town and there is a weekly Wednesday and Saturday market. Whilst the markets are popular with the community, there was a feeling that they could be better with a wider choice of produce and more local producers. There is scope to improve the type of stalls via a more flexible approach to pitches. New entrants could be encouraged to take shorter-term pitches; local farms, food providers (innovative food carts), handicrafts, vintage clothing as well as music to capitalize on leisure visitors and to drive up quality by introducing competition. The monthly Farmers market, Italian market and French markets as well as the annual Food Festival are all much better attended, which demonstrates a demand. Residents also stated they would like to have a small permanent cinema. Unfortunately, the old 1930’s building that housed Petersfield’s cinema in Swan Street became a nightclub before being demolished to make way for housing/retail (My Local). The development of a small cinema in a converted building in the centre should be encouraged.

9.3 Retail objectives and policies


RO1

Create a vibrant town centre that is a hub for the local area

RP1

Encourage new retail development in the town centre

RP2

Maintaining an appropriate mix and balance of retail uses

RP3

Temporary shops

RO2

Improve the quality and breadth of Petersfield’s regular markets

RP4

The Market Square


9.3.1 Retail Objective 1 (RO1) Create a vibrant town centre that is a hub for the local area The vitality of the town centre is essential for the town as a whole. There is currently a good mix of retail provision in the town with scope for more. The Joint Core Strategy (JCS) suggests the need for an additional 1,608m2 of comparison retail floor space (defined as items bought less frequently such as clothing, shoes, white goods and home furnishings) in Petersfield. Policy RP1 therefore encourages the provision of new retail space within the town centre with further detail shown in section 11.2 and in Table 8.

Figure 6 - Town centre boundaries and shopping frontages

Key

Town centre boundary

Primary frontage

Secondary frontage



Policy RP1 conforms to: NPPF paragraphs 23 and 28. JCS Policy CP7 (New Retail Provision) and CP8 (Town and Village Facilities and Services)

Policy RP2 seeks to maintain an appropriate balance of retail uses so that Petersfield retains its market town character whilst policy RP3 seeks to further diversify the retail provision by encouraging temporary shops in vacant premises.


Retail Policy 1 (RP1)

Encourage new retail development in the town centre

There will be a presumption in favour of proposals for additional retail floor space (use classes A1 - A5) within the town centre boundary area, as defined in Figure 6, providing that it is of a scale that complements local provision and is compatible with the size and scale of the town centre. The following sites are allocated for new retail development and are shown in more detail in Figure 6 and Table 8:

1. Petersfield Infant School (R1) (should the site no longer be required for education use)

2. Various car park sites (R2-1, R2-2, R2-3 and R2-4)

3. Royal Mail Sorting Office (MU1) (as part of a mixed retail /residential scheme)

4. BT Exchange (MU2) (as part of a mixed retail / residential scheme)

There will be a presumption against the loss of retail uses at ground floor level within the defined town centre area.

Outside the defined town centre, new provision will be limited to small scale convenience shops (A1) with a maximum floor space of 280m2 in appropriate locations to meet the daily shopping needs of the local community.


Maintaining an appropriate mix and balance of retail uses

Proposals for a mix of retail uses with the town centre will be encouraged, including shops of different sizes, cafés and financial services. Planning permission will be granted for development proposals that:

1. Retain at least 75% of the units in an unbroken run of primary frontage, as defined in Figure 6, in retail (A1) use or

2. Retain at least 50% of the units in an unbroken run of secondary frontage, as defined in Figure 6, in retail (A1) use and

3. Generate pedestrian activity within the primary shopping area by being open during the day to visiting members of the public and

4. When located within the primary shopping area, provide a shop front with a well-designed and appropriate window display.

There will be a presumption in favour of residential and non-retail uses on upper floors of premises within the town centre area.



9.3.1 Retail Objective 2 (RO2)

Improve the quality and breadth of Petersfield’s regular markets The town’s markets are an essential part of the character of the town. Policy RP4 (Aspirational Policy – See Annex D) therefore encourages greater use of the Market Square and seeks to enable a more diverse offering of goods and produce.


Temporary shops

The temporary change of use of vacant premises to pop-up shops will be encouraged within the primary and secondary shopping areas.


10 Tourism

10.1 Background Petersfield today is an attractive market town that, as part of East Hampshire, welcomes a significant number of visitors each year. In 2010 the number of visitors was estimated at 199,000 staying visits and over 3.5 million day trips to the district per year (EHDC Tourism Development Plan). The creation of the South Downs National Park in 2011, of which the town is now an integral part, will mean that these figures will increase, perhaps significantly, over the coming years. The cultural and built heritage of the town and its district will also mean an increase in tourism, as its connections with the arts and crafts movement are recognised, its artists and writers are promoted and its vibrant artistic and musical life is celebrated. Visitors spend money which will lead to increased prosperity for the area and bring additional employment. It is imperative for the town that this increase in visitor numbers, both staying visitors and day trippers, is developed to the full and the town’s availability as an accommodation and holiday centre is maximised. However, any new and expanded tourism and leisure facilities must be consistent with the National Park’s first purpose of conserving and enhancing and must not harm landscape, wildlife, historic interests or spoil other people’s enjoyment of the area. They must conform to the JCS/EHDC Tourism Strategy in developing the area’s current tourism assets in a sustainable way. Sustainable tourism is a pre-requisite for promoting the wider enjoyment of the National Park’s special qualities for the public (the Second Park Purpose) and contributes to the local economy, improves services for local people and has the potential to increase employment. The South Downs National Park Authority is seeking to attract sustainable low impact tourism by sustainable modes of transport, i.e. reducing reliance on the car and B&Bs collecting visitors from railway stations. The impacts of tourism need to be properly managed and should not damage the special qualities of the National Park. Both accommodation providers and visitor attractions can make their businesses more sustainable through reducing energy and water use, using locally produced food and promoting sustainable travel and local walking and cycling routes.

10.2 Community feedback

The community felt very strongly that Petersfield does not sell itself particularly well as a key town within the South Downs. It was also felt that tourist facilities were limited and could be significantly expanded. People felt that the strengths of the town and its immediate surroundings are many and are principally of an outdoor variety. The Heath and lake attract visitors at all times of the year and recent improvements to catering facilities have been highly successful. Walking along the South Downs Way, the Shipwrights Way and the Serpent Trail are strong attractions and, together with local walking, offer visitors plenty of opportunity to enjoy the town and countryside. Many miles along these ways are also accessible and available for cyclists and horses.


It was also considered important that visitors should be encouraged to spend their money in a sustainable way with local businesses which have a good fit with the themes of community, landscape and the environment. There is also perhaps an opportunity for businesses to link up to promote low impact tourism together. There was a very clear view that Petersfield lacked visitor accommodation in general and, in particular, an up-market hotel within walking distance of the town centre.

10.3 Tourism objectives and policies


TO1

Improve and increase hotel accommodation

TP1

Additional hotel accommodation

TO2

Provide a new and expanded tourist hub

TP2

Expanded tourist hub

TP3

Promoting the town

10.3.1 Tourism Objective 1 (TO1) Improve and increase hotel accommodation The key to improving Petersfield’s offering to tourists is to increase holiday accommodation. If this is not achieved then Petersfield, by definition, remains a day-tripper’s destination. Policy TP1 therefore encourages the provision of new hotel accommodation in the town.

Policy TP1 conforms to: NPPF paragraphs 7,19,20,23 and 28. JCS Policies CP6 (Rural economy and enterprise), CP8 (Town and Village facilities and services) and CP9 (Tourism)

Tourism Policy 1 (TP1)

Additional hotel accommodation

Proposals for additional hotel and holiday accommodation will be supported in appropriate locations, in particular in the Festival Hall / Red Lion area of the town centre, subject to compliance with other policies of the Plan and the East Hampshire District Local Plan: Joint Core Strategy (JCS).


10.3.2 Tourism Objective 2 (TO2) Provide a new and expanded tourist hub

The Tourist Information Centre (TIC) is currently located in the library. This restricts the opening hours – if the library is closed then the TIC is also closed. To promote the town successfully the TIC needs to be in its own building with its own dedicated access and open for longer hours, perhaps every day in the summer months. The Petersfield Town Museum is currently seeking to move to larger premises by acquiring the redundant police station adjoining their current premises. This is welcomed and encouraged and these much larger premises have the potential to become a new tourism hub which could also contain the Tourist Information Centre. This will require the agreement of all parties concerned and the discussions will need to take place between East Hampshire District Council, Tourism South East (who manage the centre on behalf of EHDC), Hampshire County Council and the Petersfield Museum Trustees to ascertain whether this is viable and achievable. Policy TP2 therefore proposes the creation of an enhanced Tourist Hub by co-locating the Tourist Information Centre within the enlarged town museum.

Policy TP2 conforms to: NPPF paragraphs 7,19,20,23 and 28. JCS Policy CP9 (Tourism)

Petersfield is very much part of the National Park and must promote itself as such to the general public to obtain the fullest benefit from this. The key to achieving this increase in visitor numbers and managing the logistical requirements that it will inevitably bring is paramount to continued growth. The town should be promoted from two perspectives, firstly as an entity on its own and secondly as a major town within the National Park. Petersfield should be promoted as the Gateway to the National Park. This will require a co-ordinated approach to advertising and promotion by the Town and District Councils and most importantly by the National Park. This approach has already begun with initiatives such as Visit Hampshire which markets tourism for the county and receives funding from the County Council. Additionally, as part of the National Park, the town benefits from promotion to international markets such as the USA, Germany and France. It is important that this promotion is co-ordinated by a single authority. A joint website covering all three organisations, whilst advantageous in many ways, may be difficult to achieve but it is imperative that websites are linked and there is a joined up approach to advertising the town and national park and providing the information required by visitors. Policy TP3 (Aspirational Policy – see Annex D) takes these principles and proposes a coordinated approach to promoting the town.


Expanded tourist hub

Planning permission will be granted for the conversion of an existing building within the town centre, including the former police station, for use as an expanded heritage, cultural and visitor information centre.


11 The Town Masterplan This section of the plan contains a series of proposals which, together, form the town’s masterplan. The maps in this section are referred to by the policies and thus form part of the plan’s statutory planning guidance. All the maps in this section are reproduced at Annex E in fold-out A3 format. There are a number of significant changes to the town which are detailed in this section of the plan which are outwith the new housing and employment allocations discussed in more detail in section 12. The key proposals which this section puts forward are: 1. The overall allocation of sites for housing, employment, community use and community green

space. The sites allocated for community use and green space will be protected by the policies in the community and natural environment sections of this plan

2. A more detailed proposal for opportunities within the town centre

a. The infant school’s main building, should it be no longer required for education use, is allocated as a retail unit

b. New small retail stalls are proposed in the main car park and Festival Hall car park whilst the Royal Mail sorting office and BT Exchange building are both allocated for mixed retail and residential use

c. The remainder of the infant school site, should it no longer be required for education, is allocated as residential housing

d. The commercial site to the south of Station Road is allocated as mixed residential and employment

e. Areas to the west and south of the Festival Hall site are allocated for mixed residential employment whilst preserving the setting of the Festival Hall itself

3. A series of pedestrian and cycling improvements are proposed to (a) address current hot-spots

and (b) improve the town’s ‘walkability’

4. A strategy for dealing with parking issues is proposed. This includes encouraging visitors to use ‘interceptor’ car parks rather than driving into the town centre and also, if needed, providing additional parking capacity at the station and Tesco car parks using additional decks

5. Finally, there is more detail regarding the key tenets of a Town Centre Vision, which includes:

a. A shared space town centre – pedestrian friendly, but still open to vehicles

b. Redevelopment of the Frenchmans Road area to create a modern business hub at the centre of our town

c. Redevelopment of the infant school and Hylton Road area

d. Enhancement of the central car park and Physic Garden area

e. Redevelopment of the Festival Hall area


The maps contained in this section are as follows: Overall site allocation – this map shows the overall allocation of sites for housing, employment, community use and green space. Town centre opportunities – this map shows the more detailed town centre sites that have been allocated for residential or employment use. Getting around – this map details the improvements which need to be made to our road and cycle networks and should be read in conjunction with section 5 (Getting Around). Parking – this map summarises our strategy for parking and should also be read in conjunction with section 5 (Getting Around). Town centre vision – this map shows a vision for the town centre. It is followed by a series of individual design briefs for specific areas of the town centre.


11.1 Overall site allocation

Figure 7 - Overall site allocation Details of the site allocations can be found in the following policies: Housing – HP1 Employment – BP1 Community – CP1 and CP2 Green Space – NEP2



11.2 Town centre opportunities

Figure 8 - Town centre opportunities

Ref Name Allocation Area (ha)

Effective Residential Area (ha)

No. of dwellings @ 70dph

Effective Retail Area m

2

Effective Employment

Area (ha)

R1 Infant School main building

Retail 0.04 400

R2 New retail units in car parks

Retail 0.05 500

MU1 Royal Mail Sorting Office

Mixed-Retail 0.11 0.07 5 360

MU2 BT exchange Mixed-Retail 0.23 0.15 11 1000

H6-1 Infant School south site

Residential 0.28 0.28 20

MU3 Site west and south of Festival Hall

Mixed-Employment

0.26 0.17 12 0.09

MU4 Site south of Station Road

Mixed-Employment

0.22 0.15 10 0.07

Totals 1.19 0.82 58 2360 0.16

Table 8 - Town centre opportunities

Notes: 1. For mixed-use sites, the effective residential area is 2/3 of the site and the effective employment area is 1/3

of the site. 2. Town centre mixed-employment sites, MU3 and MU4 will favour B1 (Offices) and C/D categories (Hotels,

Leisure, Cinema). General industry and storage/distribution (B2, B8) will not be permitted on these sites due to the disruption caused by lorries in the town centre.

3. In addition to those sites identified in Table 13, land at Dragon Street/High Street is anticipated to accommodate in the region of 18 dwellings. The site has been previously identified in work undertaken by the SDNPA and East Hants DC. It is shown on the map as site H6-2.



11.3 Getting around

Figure 9 - Traffic and cycling improvements

Further details for these proposed improvements can be found in policies GAP2 and GAP3 and in the following tables.



Table 9 - Proposed traffic improvements

No. Location Issue / Proposal

1 Osier Road railway crossing Create official cycle path here using existing underpass

2 Tilmore / Merritts Meadow New cycle path through Merritts Meadow and Playing Fields (possible alternative route for the Shipwright’s Way)

3 Junction of Ramshill and Station Road New segregated cycle lanes on both side of the road. One side to be contraflow

4 Borough Road New cycle path next to existing footpath

5 Penns Place Start of Petersfield to Midhurst cycle and pedestrian path

6 Rival Moor Road New cycle path adjacent to Rival Moor Road

7 Gorse Road New connecting cycle path

8 The Heath New cycle path along Heath Road

9 The Market Square New cycle stands in the Market Square

10 Pulens Lane Better pedestrian crossings across Pulens Lane (Love Lane and Moggs Mead, Durford road)

11 Lavant Street New cycle parking as part of Shared Space scheme

12 Swan Street Contra flow segregated cycle lane on the north side of Swan St

13 The Borough New cycle path

14 Penns Place Cycle path link

15 Junction of Pulens Lane and A272 New junction design - to include pedestrian crossings

16 The Heath Cycle path adjacent to Heath Road East

17 Pulens Lane and Love Lane Advisory cycle lanes / junction is also a schools access point

18 Cranford Road Advisory cycle lanes

19 St Peter’s Road Advisory cycle lanes – current school pedestrian access

20 Durford Road Advisory cycle lanes

21 Merritts Meadow to Sussex Road Advisory cycle lanes linking Merritts Meadow to the Hangers Way at Sussex Road

Table 10 - Proposed pedestrian and cycle improvements

No. Location Issue

A Pulens Lane / Durford Road Traffic speeds, particular problems near crossing points, junctions and the Tilmore brook corner. Schools nearby. New developments generating traffic, including in Penns Place area and Penns Fields, plus from sports developments - will affect both roads

B Causeway Traffic speeds

C Moggs Mead Traffic speeds, volume of traffic and parked cars

D Bell Hill Traffic speeds

E Dragon Street / Sussex Road junction Congestion

F Tilmore Road bridge Narrow bridge - dangerous for pedestrians

G Tilmore Road junction with Station Road Difficulty of turning out of Tilmore Road onto Station Road

H Winchester Road / Rushes Road crossing Volume of traffic prevents pedestrians from crossing safely

I Swan Street / Charles Street junction Difficult crossing with cars coming around bottom of Charles street too quickly – route is key access to Hospital / GP surgery

J Churcher's school entrance Congestion east at peak times - junction with service station opposite – tailbacks down London Road (A272)

K Tor Way Traffic speeds

L Station Road / Ramshill junction Traffic speeds. Level crossing congestion - vehicle and pedestrian movement conflict with station forecourt exit / entrance


11.4 Parking

Figure 10 - Parking strategy

The parking strategy is outlined in section 5 and detailed in policies GAP5, GAP7, HP8 and GAP8.

It can be summarised as follows:

Ensure new developments provide adequate off-street parking (Policy HP8)

Increase parking capacity in the town by providing multi-level at the Station and Tesco overflow car parks (Policy GAP5)

Introduce residents’ parking in all areas adjacent to the town centre (Policy GAP8)

Improve parking signage (Policy GAP7)

Introduce preferential business rates in multi-level car parks (Policy GAP8)



11.5 Town centre vision

Figure 11 - The town centre vision

The town centre vision includes the following elements:

A shared space town centre

Redevelopment of the Frenchmans Road area

Redevelopment of the infant school and Hylton Road area

Enhancement of the central car park and Physic Garden area

Redevelopment of the Festival Hall area

More detailed design briefs for each of these elements can be found in the following sections.

Cultural/prominent buildings

Employment

Residential

Mixed Use

New Retail

Multi-deck parking

Town Centre Building

Shared space area (pedestrian/cycle priority)

Pedestrian Priority

Enhanced Landscaping


11.5.1 Shared space town centre

Key Points: Objectives of a shared space scheme:

Reduce vehicle speeds

Improve pedestrian and cyclist safety

Create a ‘café society’ feel

Promote walking and cycling throughout the town

Encourage a larger shopping footfall in the town centre

Eliminate illegal parking – clearer parking control zone area and signage

Improve the first impression of the town for visitors arriving at the railway station Features:

Creation of a shared space environment starting at the railway station and extending down the High Street to the war memorial. Areas included are shown in yellow on the above map. See also artist’s impressions at Figure 12, Figure 13 and Figure 14

Mixture of shared space and pedestrian/ cycle friendly streets. Remove segregation of vehicles and pedestrians

Removal of traffic signs incompatible with shared space design

Provision of pedestrian-friendly street furniture – benches, trees/bushes, green spaces, water features, sculptures

Provision of a limited number of parking bays

Pedestrian and cycle-friendly Chapel Street, upper Lavant Street

See key on Page 78


What is a shared space? Shared space is a concept that has come from successful public spaces in Europe that integrate the movement of people in a variety of forms where each form acknowledges and respects each other. The idea is further supported in Manual for Streets. A number of successful shared space schemes have now been implemented in the UK with more being planned. The idea is to allow motorised traffic and pedestrians/cyclists to coexist rather than banishing traffic from the public space – all streets are public spaces as opposed to roads that reinforce segregation. A dual carriageway in open countryside or motorway is a clear example of a road that is not a public place or space. Whereas, a town market square is clearly a public space. Shared space views the area as a public space first and foremost for people, to facilitate their activities not restrict them. Traffic becomes the equal of all functions not the primary one relegating the others. The technique seeks to design-in eye contact between users and thus the streets have a low design-speed that enables this. The social space is designed in such a manner that we do not conceive it as a traffic space but as people space. The person in a vehicle or cycle is aware of the fact that they are a guest in that space because of its layout thus he/she adjusts their behaviour accordingly to that context. The character of ‘people space’ or ‘people street’ is enhanced by incorporating rather than

excluding traffic and infrastructure into the spatial design. Landmarks and features irrelevant to the standard traffic highway world are integrated into it.

The other acknowledgement is that what feels safe is not necessarily safe - the biggest mistake you can make is giving the illusion of safety by regulation and segregation. Conversely, what seems unsafe can actually be safer because people are more alert to their surroundings and context.

The behaviour of all, including drivers, is more

determined by the contextual signals than by rules, instructions and prohibitions.

Policies which will achieve this: GAP4 and GAP7

The following pages show artist’s impressions of a possible shared space scheme. The images are viewed from:

The north west corner of the Square looking east

The bottom of Lavant Street looking towards the station

Chapel Street viewed from the bottom of Lavant Street

Widemarsh Street, Hereford Photograph courtesy Ben Hamilton-Baillie

New Road, Brighton Photograph courtesy Graham Steaggles


Figure 13 - Potential shared space scheme viewed from the bottom of Lavant Street

Figure 12 - Potential shared space scheme viewed from the NW corner of The Square


Figure 14 - Potential shared space scheme viewed from the corner of Chapel Street and Lavant Street

d


11.5.2 Frenchmans Road area

11.5.3 Former Police Station and Hylton Road area

Key Points:

If the site of the infant school was no longer required for education use then it could be redeveloped to provide some residential accommodation with the original infant school building being reserved for retail use.

As part of the re-development, create an inviting pedestrian route to the town centre for people using what is currently the Tesco overflow car park, but will become a multi-deck interceptor car park.

Former Police Station to become part of an expanded Museum and Tourist Hub Policies which will achieve this: HP1, CP1, TP2, RP1

Key Points:

Reserved for employment use

Regenerate from existing light-industrial to a more office-based environment

Potential for provision of serviced office space for small businesses and start-ups

Possibility of creating a Business Enterprise Centre using European grant funding

As part of the regeneration, enhance the green space and make a feature of the stream

Provide good quality pedestrian access into the town centre

Policies which will achieve this: BP1, BP2, BP3, BP5, BP6, BP7, BP8

See key on Page 78

See key on Page 78


11.5.4 Central car park and Physic Garden area

Key Points:

Enhance views of and access to the stream with a new landscaped area to the rear of the Physic Garden

Improve access from the Physic Garden to this new area

Provide new retail kiosks / small shops to help bring this area to life Policies which will achieve this: BP1, NEP1, RP1

See key on Page 78


11.5.5 Festival Hall area

Vision The Festival Hall and surrounding area is a key part of the town, offering an excellent performance venue, community hall and open air swimming pool. However, the area could be improved to provide high quality employment facilities and, potentially, a town centre hotel. It is also difficult for visitors to find their way to the car park and they can often end up driving through the town centre. It is therefore proposed to provide a new access off Tor Way. Any redevelopment of this site should be holistic and thus should carefully consider the entire site and its character. In particular, the setting of the existing four grade II listed buildings within the site: the Old Masonic Hall, the Red Lion Hotel, Border Cottage and The Old Cottage should be maintained or enhanced. Key Points:

Provide access off Tor Way, thus discouraging traffic from accessing the town centre

Remove through access from Heath Road

Redevelop existing buildings that front onto the car park to provide a series of high quality residential and employment facilities

Encourage this as a potential location for a town centre hotel

Provide a small retail unit behind the Festival Hall together with enhanced landscaping to make the hall and pool more of a destination

Policies that will achieve this: HP1, BP1, CP1, GAP6, TP1, RP1

See key on Page 78


12 Design Frameworks

12.1 Typical densities In order to understand the intent of the Design Frameworks in the plan, it is useful to put into context what is meant by housing density. Housing density is typically expressed in dwellings per hectare or dph. This simply means the number of complete dwellings that exist on every full hectare of land. Like any town, Petersfield has a range of densities which are appropriate to the use and context of the individual sites. Some examples are shown below for reference.

Heath Road 6.9 hectares 40 dwellings

5.8 dph

Coxes Meadow 2.4 hectares 15 dwellings

6.2 dph

Larcombe Road 4.3 hectares 124 dwellings

29.2 dph

Osborne Road 1.0 hectares 43 dwellings

43 dph

Charlton Drive 3.1 hectares 130 dwellings

42 dph

Fitzhamon House 0.45 hectares 27 dwellings

60 dph


12.2 The site Design Frameworks The remainder of this section contains detailed Design Frameworks for each of the new housing and employment sites. Please note that the site plans are indicative only and not to scale. Each framework outlines a set of principles that provide high-level guidance to steer the design and delivery of these sites. In general, the principles seek to minimise the impact on the natural environment and create high quality and attractive neighbourhoods. The frameworks should be read in conjunction with the relevant impact mitigation measures suggested in the Sustainability Appraisal which accompanies this plan. Certain sites are identified as requiring mineral resource information prior to development. For these sites, discussion should take place with the South Downs National Park Authority prior to any specific development proposal to develop the site, to establish what mineral resource information (and the level of information) is required by the Mineral Planning Authority. It is recommended that in the event of a developer taking a development proposal forward which overlays safeguarded minerals resource that a Minerals Assessment Report is produced for the Mineral Planning Authority. It would be most beneficial to the developer if this was submitted to the SDNPA prior to submission of any application to allow for early discussions to take place. The report should broadly address key issues including:

Site setting – location, access, site description, geology and constraints

Planning status in respect of minerals safeguarding

Policy context (both national and local), Mineral Safeguarding Area

Constraints upon prior extraction – inter alia previous mineral working, hydrology of area, utilities and market issues (viability and/or quantity of resource present)

The site plans explore high level opportunities in terms of access, routes, public space provision, environment and landscape considerations but do not address more detailed issues in terms of typologies, the positioning of individual units or plots, or architectural character. The site plans also provide indicative block layout principles. Figure 15 below shows how these indications of blocks could translate into individual dwellings. Each block is not intended to indicate a continuous mass of development and could be fulfilled by a range of detached, semi-detached or terraced housing as appropriate to the context of the site and the required density. These layouts are illustrative whilst the accompanying design principles and considerations are mandatory.

Indicative block layout as shown

Figure 15 - Example of block layouts

Example of a compliant dwelling layout


Finally, each framework includes an indicative density. This is intended as a guide as to what is appropriate for that particular site. However, further information or constraints may become evident during the lifetime of the plan and limited variation of these densities is therefore permitted at the discretion of the planning authority.

The drawings use the following notation:

Figure 16 - Design framework notation


12.3 Site allocations The sites allocated for residential housing and employment use are shown on the overall site allocations in section 11.1 and are reproduced in Figure 17 below with a reference code for each site. The detailed allocations for these sites are listed in Table 1 of Housing Policy HP1 on page 12 and Table 7 of Business Policy BP1 on page 60.

Figure 17 - Site allocations and reference codes

Site Ref.

Site Name

H1 Land at Causeway Farm

H2 Land north of Buckmore Farm and west of Bell Hill

H3 Penns Field

H4 Land south of Larcombe Road

H5 Land south east of the Causeway

H6 Town centre redevelopment opportunities (see section 11.2 for more detail)

H7 Land west of the Causeway

H8 Land south of Durford Road

H9 Hampshire County Council Depot off Paddock Way

H10 Existing Community Centre site

H11 Land north of Reservoir Lane

H12 Land at Bulmer House Site, off Ramshill

B1 Land north of Buckmore Farm

B2 Land at The Domes

B6 Car park off Frenchmans Road

Table 11 - Housing and employment site references and names



12.1 Site H1 Design Framework – Land at Causeway Farm

Design Principles: Delivery Considerations:

Protect views from Sussex Road to the South Downs, ensuring any new development is accommodated on the western part of the site.

Protect the river corridor and prevent direct development in flood zone 1 areas.

Establish a well-connected internal street environment with new public rights of way. The existing footpath should be retained although may need to be slightly re-aligned.

Contain semi-formal green spaces which help to bridge the gap between residential development and the landscape beyond.

Traffic implications must be carefully considered. Highly desirable to incorporate multiple points of access from the B2070 and possibly Sussex Road.

The setting of the existing grade II listed barn at Causeway Farm dairy should be respected.

Provision of a connection to the nearest point of adequate capacity in the sewerage network, as advised by Southern Water. Additional local sewerage infrastructure would be required to accommodate development in this location.

Ensure future access to the existing sewerage infrastructure for maintenance and upsizing purposes.

See also proposed mitigation measures detailed at Appendix G of the Sustainability Appraisal.

Mineral Resource information will be required prior to development (see section 12.2).

Approximate density: 28 dph Indicative number of dwellings: up to 200

Map data ©2015 Google Imagery ©2015, Digitalglobe,

Getmapping plc, Infoterra Ltd & Bluesky


12.2 Site H3 Design Framework – Penns Field


Improve the view from the South Downs into Petersfield by providing well designed frontages which address the landscape.

In the northern part of the site there is an established belt of trees which acts as a buffer between the existing homes and new development.

In the southern part of the site the development has been laid out so that new gardens will back onto existing gardens on either side of the mature hedge line.

Maintain the mature trees and existing field lines to reduce potential visual impact.

A landscape buffer will need to be maintained between development and the River Rother corridor.

Provide improved pedestrian access to Tilmore Brook with appropriate ecological mitigation measures.

SDNPA and Highways Authority to determine appropriate access arrangements.




Discussion should take place with the SDNPA prior to any specific development proposal to develop the site, to establish what mineral resource information (and the level of information) is required by the Mineral Planning Authority.

Approximate density: 24 dph Indicative number of dwellings: 89




12.3 Site H4 and H7 Design Framework – Land south of Larcombe Road and west of the Causeway


Have a well-connected internal street environment with multiple connections to the Causeway and into the existing neighbourhood at Test Close and Larcombe Road.

Provide frontage to the playing fields and landscape beyond.

Enable pedestrian access through the development and to the landscape beyond.

The design of roads to include shared surface, planting and other traffic calming measures should help to prevent access roads being used as short cuts.

Protect and enhance Stanbridge Stream as part of the development.

The development should contribute to improving the existing play and sports facilities at Paddock Way.

Traffic implications must be carefully considered.

The setting of the listed building at 211 Causeway Road should be respected.








12.4 Site H5 Design Framework – Land south of the Causeway


The development has already been granted planning permission and this drawing reflects the consented scheme.

Provide access from the roundabout on the B2070.

Define a well-connected internal street environment with a block structure that addresses new streets.

Provide frontage to the landscape beyond.

Contain formalised green public spaces to help break up the tight block structure and provide amenity space.

Provide new footpath connections linking existing public rights of way.

Consider opportunities to improve permeability and connections.

The setting of the grade II listed Causeway Farmhouse should be respected



Mineral Resource information will be required prior to development (see section 12.2)

Approximate density: 23 dph Indicative no. of dwellings: 71




12.5 Site H8 Design Framework – Land south of Durford Road


This site is allocated for housing to meet the needs of an ageing population (see Housing Policy HP3).

Protect and enhance views to the South Downs from the existing residential area of Harrier Way.

Contain formalised wedges of public space to draw the landscape into the residential development.

Multiple points of access from Harrier Way and the existing lane to the north.

Provide frontage to the public space and landscape beyond.

Land to the north of this site is allocated as employment land and appropriate mitigation should be incorporated to reduce the impact on H8.

The site is ecologically sensitive and will require careful consideration of biodiversity issues. The number of dwellings and scale of the full development will be determined through the development management process in consideration of landscape impact on the SDNP and opportunities will be taken for the restoration and management of habitats as part of the scheme.





Approximate density: N/A Indicative number of dwellings: minimum of 48 dwellings*

*Due to the nature of the development proposed on the site, Continuing Care and Retirement Community (CCRC), an indicative dwelling number derived from approximate density is not appropriate.




12.6 Site H9 Design Framework – Hampshire County Council Depot off Paddock Way


A continuation of the existing residential neighbourhood.

Access should be provided from Borough Road / Paddock Way.

Enjoy pedestrian access to the playing fields to the south.

Maintain a small wedge of green space in the centre of the new blocks.

Retain the existing buffer of trees between the site and the railway line.

Opportunity for the negotiation of a second access point to the south east off Paddock Way.

Potential for contaminated land – ground water quality will need to be protected.



Discussion should take place with SDNPA prior to any specific development proposal, to establish how the proposal seeks to address the requirements of Policy 16 of the Hampshire Mineral and Waste Plan 2013 in relation to the safeguarded coated road-stone depot.





12.7 Site H10 Design Framework – Community Centre site


Provide key and prominent frontage to the junction at Ramshill, a key route into the town.

Be developed at relatively high density as a small block of flats (perhaps suitable for sheltered housing).

Provide off street car parking behind the building.

A small sub-station currently exists on the corner of the site.

The community centre facility MUST be provided elsewhere in order for this development to come forward.


Provision of a connection to the nearest point of adequate capacity in the sewerage network, as advised by Southern Water.





12.8 Site H11 Design Framework – Land to north of Reservoir Lane


Site H11 is reserved for self or custom build homes only (See Housing Policy HP7).

Retain the existing residential character of detached dwellings on larger plots.

The site is only appropriate for low density housing due to access constraints along Tilmore Road and Reservoir Lane.

The setting of the grade II listed Shirtles/Tilmore House should be respected.






12.9 Site H12 Design Framework – Land at Bulmer House site, off Ramshill


This site is allocated for housing to meet the needs of an ageing population (see Housing Policy HP3).





12.10 Sites B1 & H2 Design Framework – Land north of Buckmore Farm

B1, Employment Land north of Buckmore Farm


The business site is to maintain a 7m buffer for tree planting to mature along its southern edge in perpetuity.

Access road to the business site is to be along its northern perimeter to allow tree planting and separation between the business uses and the open space. This is in order to ensure any business premises are well screened from the public open space.

The access road that crosses the open space is to provide an east/west pedestrian priority and its character should protect and reinforce the landscape characteristics of this open space.

The business units should have their long axis orientated north/south in order to minimise visual impact in views from the south. Roof finishes and cladding should be dark in tone and non-reflective.

The setting of the adjacent listed buildings should be respected.




H2, Residential Land north of Buckmore Farm, west of Bell Hill


Site H2 is reserved for self or custom build homes only (See Housing Policy HP7).

Connect Bell Hill Recreation Ground to the new green space next to the A3, increasing community green space and creating a new green corridor into the town.

Protection of existing trees and hedges is to be a priority with access to be located where impact to existing landscape features is minimised. This is to reduce visual impact in views from the south-west and protect the visual amenity of the proposed/existing open space. Retain the existing field pattern and mature hedgerows with development respecting these boundaries.

Provide a connection to Winchester Road via the new employment site to the south.

Connect the site to existing footpaths, particularly towards the north of the A3.

The design of roads to include shared surface and other traffic calming measures to prevent access roads being used as short cuts.

Roads and public realm rather than private gardens are to address the existing trees in order to reduce future pressure to fell.

Development is to have a positive relationship to the open space with active frontage onto the public realm providing natural surveillance.

The location and orientation of residential development should make the most efficient use of the land whilst minimising impact on views from the National Park.

Residential development should reduce in density, scale of blocks and height from south to north.

Residential development is to be respectful of existing residential amenities to the east of the site.

Residential development should provide a mixture of unit types including flats, semi-detached and terraced houses and detached houses.

Noise pollution from the A3.






12.11 Site B2 Design Framework – Land at The Domes

B2, Employment Land at The Domes


Suitable for employment use class B1 only, due to proximity of residential housing.

Traffic implications will need to be carefully assessed and, if necessary, mitigated.

Development should respect the setting of the residential property to the west.







12.12 Site B6 Design Framework – car park off Frenchmans Road

B6, Employment Land at cark park off Frenchmans Road


Development of this site should contribute to the broader re-development of the entire area as detailed in section 11.5.2.

Development should respect and enhance the stream flowing along the western edge of the site.






13 Supporting Documents and References

13.1 Supporting Documents The following documents are published in support of this plan and can all be found on the Neighbourhood Plan website, www.petersfieldsplan.co.uk.

Document Name Purpose

Consultation Statement Mandatory Statement setting out the consultation process which has been followed to produce the plan

Basic Conditions Statement Mandatory statement which sets out how the plan complies with the basic conditions

Forming the Plan Explains the process by which the plan was formed with particular attention to the site selection process.

Petersfield Housing Study, Navigus Planning, Sep 13

This is a housing needs study report commissioned by the Neighbourhood Plan steering group

CBA Detailed Housing Requirement, Oct 13

This is a more detailed analysis of housing requirement for Petersfield which builds upon the Navigus report.

Sustainability Assessment (SA)

Provides an assessment of the overall sustainability impact of the plan

SDNPA Updated Landscape Capacity Assessment

Updated version of the SDNPA Landscape Capacity Study for Petersfield – updated Apr 14

SDNPA PNP Landscape Assessments

Landscape assessments of significant PNP sites that were not previously subject to a detailed landscape assessment by the SDNPA


13.2 References Documents and Reports Building for Life 12 Department for Communities and Local Government: Housing Standards Review, 2013 East Hampshire District Council Joint Core Strategy (Adopted 2014) East Hampshire District Council Local Plan Second Review East Hampshire District Council Shopfronts Design Guide 2005 EHDC Commercial property survey May 2014 EHDC Leisure Built Facilities Strategy 2012 – 2026 Employment Land reviews Guidance note 2004 (ODPM) Green Infrastructure Study for East Hampshire District 2011 - 2028 (July 2013) Kingshurst Consultancy Group, East Hants Employment and Skills Audit & Action Plan, June 2010 Mayor of London – Housing Space Standards (2006) Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners Report, Petersfield Retail Study, August 2012 Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners, Petersfield Employment Land requirement, May 2014 National Planning Policy Framework (2012) Petersfield Area Transport Strategy (PATS) 2000 – 2011 Petersfield Conservation Area Character Appraisal and Management Plan 2014 (The Conservation Studio) Petersfield Conservation Area Character Appraisal and Management Plan 2014 Petersfield Heath Management Plan 2005 - 2010, Heathland Management Services for Petersfield Town Council 2005 Petersfield Nature - A Biodiversity Action Plan for Petersfield (December 2013) Petersfield Town Design Statement (2010) RIBA – The Case for Space, The Size of England’s New Homes (2011) Rotherlands Nature Conservation Management Plan, Petersfield Town Council, Ron Allen, The Environmental Project Consulting Group, November 1997 South Downs Integrated Landscape Character Assessment (2011) South Downs Landscape Assessment for Petersfield Reserve Sites Report (May 13) South Downs Landscape Capacity Study for Petersfield and Liss (Jun 13) South Downs National Park Access Network and Accessible Natural Greenspace Study (January 2014) South Downs National Park Authority - Viability Assessment: Community Infrastructure Levy & Affordable Housing Strategic Flood Risk Assessment for Local Development Framework, Halcrow Group Limited (April 2008) South Downs National Park Local Plan South Downs Partnership Management Plan 2014 – 2019, 2013 The Cycle Plan for East Hampshire (2013) The East Hampshire District Transport (access) Statement (Sep 12) The Petersfield Plan - Baseline Report: Issues and Choices, June 2011 (David Lock Associates) The Petersfield Plan – Options Report, Oct 2011 (David Lock Associates) Websites CABE at the Design Council Census 2001, 2011 Co-housing in the UK Community Land Trusts EHDC - Countryside EHDC – Conservation Areas EHDC – Listed Buildings EHDC – Natural and Built Environment EHDC – Planning Applications Friends of Petersfield Heath Government Policies on Self and Custom Build

http://www.designcouncil.org.uk/knowledge-resources/guide/building-life-12

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/230251/2_-_Housing_Standards_Review_-_Technical_Standards_Document.pdf

http://www.easthants.gov.uk/ehdc/planningpolicy.nsf/webpages/Adoption+of+Joint+Core+Strategy

http://www.easthants.gov.uk/ehdc/planningpolicy.nsf/webpages/Local+Plan+2nd+Review

http://www.easthants.gov.uk/ehdc/formsfordownload.nsf/0/4530C06FC33476E88025700500363635/$File/Shopfronts+des+guide+0505.pdf

http://www.easthants.gov.uk/ehdc/formsfordownload.nsf/0/9C3D03CFC28C99A680257A5200346E07/$File/CD11+H25+Leisure+Strategy+2012.pdf

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/7722/147540.pdf

http://www.easthants.gov.uk/ehdc/formsfordownload.nsf/0/B3C9B34103B2058E80257BB900384963/$File/Part+1+East+Hampshire+Green+Infrastructure+Strategy+2011+-+2028.pdf

http://www.easthants.gov.uk/ehdc/formsfordownload.nsf/0/CC565506709342568025775E003906F7/$File/EmploymentAudit2010.pdf

http://www.london.gov.uk/sites/default/files/archives/uploads-space-standards.pdf

http://www.southdowns.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/275305/Petersfield-Retail-Capacity-Update-2012.pdf

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/6077/2116950.pdf

http://www.petersfieldtomorrow.co.uk/documents/PetersfieldBAP.pdf

http://petersfield.pbworks.com/w/page/16144177/The%20Town%20Design%20Statement

http://www.architecture.com/Files/RIBAHoldings/PolicyAndInternationalRelations/HomeWise/CaseforSpace.pdf

http://www.rotherlands.co.uk/home.shtml

http://www.southdowns.gov.uk/planning/integrated-landscape-character-assessment

http://www.southdowns.gov.uk/planning/planning-policy/joint-working-with-local-authorities/east-hampshire-district-council/landscape-assessments

http://www.southdowns.gov.uk/planning/planning-policy/joint-working-with-local-authorities/east-hampshire-district-council/landscape-assessments

http://www.southdowns.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0014/406013/CONSULTATION-DRAFT-Access-Network-and-ANG-Study-SDNPA-

http://www.southdowns.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/422229/SDNPA-AH-and-CIL-Viability-Assessment-DSP-Final-Report.pdf

http://www.southdowns.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/422229/SDNPA-AH-and-CIL-Viability-Assessment-DSP-Final-Report.pdf

http://www.easthants.gov.uk/ehdc/formsfordownload.nsf/c9fbd1571b60536c8025756e004af43d/5BE6D7E0D55C07E98025798E004AB6C9/$File/StrategicFloodRiskAssessment.pdf

http://www.easthants.gov.uk/ehdc/formsfordownload.nsf/c9fbd1571b60536c8025756e004af43d/5BE6D7E0D55C07E98025798E004AB6C9/$File/StrategicFloodRiskAssessment.pdf

http://www.southdowns.gov.uk/planning/planning-policy/local-plan

http://www.southdowns.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/409799/SD_ManPlan__2013_15.pdf

http://www3.hants.gov.uk/east-hampshire-transport-statement-final-2012.pdf

http://www.davidlock.com/petersfieldplan/pdf/petersfieldPlanBaselineReportJune2011.pdf

http://www.southdowns.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0013/161050/Petersfield-Options-Report-October-2011-SDNPA-Edit.pdf

http://www.designcouncil.org.uk/our-services/built-environment

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/census/2011/census-data/index.html

http://www.cohousing.org.uk/

http://www.communitylandtrusts.org.uk/home

http://www.easthants.gov.uk/ehdc/HeritageWeb.nsf/webpages/Countryside

http://www.easthants.gov.uk/ehdc/HeritageWeb.nsf/webpages/Conservation+Areas

http://www.easthants.gov.uk/ehdc/HeritageWeb.nsf/webpages/Listed+Buildings

http://www.easthants.gov.uk/ehdc/planningpolicy.nsf/webpages/Background+Research+Natural+and+Built+Environment

http://www.easthants.gov.uk/home.nsf/AtoZListing/Planning+applications?

http://www.foph.net/

http://www.homesandcommunities.co.uk/ourwork/custom-build


Hampshire Home Choice Land Registry Office for National Statistics SDNPA - Conservation The National Self-build Association The Petersfield Society The Self-build Portal Valuation Office Agency Books

Living Streets, 2005

Postwar Petersfield, David Jeffery, Sutton Publishing, Stroud, Gloucestershire. 2006

Risk, Prof J Adams, 2006

Shared space – room for everyone. A vision for public spaces. Interegg 111b .pb Frysian Province, Leeuwarden Netherlands. On behalf of Germany, UK, Holland, France, Belgium. 2007

Streets for All SE and Various publications. Ben Hamilton Baillee, 2000+

The Buildings of England - Hampshire: Winchester and the North, Michael Bullen, John Crook, Rodney and Nikolaus Pevsner, Yale University Press, London 2010

https://www.hampshirehomechoice.org.uk/Data/ASPPages/1/30.aspx

http://www.landregistry.gov.uk/

http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/index.html

http://www.southdowns.gov.uk/looking-after/conservation

http://www.nasba.org.uk/

http://www.petersfieldsociety.org.uk/

http://www.selfbuildportal.org.uk/

http://www.voa.gov.uk/


14 Acknowledgements The Petersfield Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group would like to thank the following individuals and organisations for their help in preparing this plan: Allies and Morrison Architects Alyson Linnegar Caroline Hilton, Pelican GeoGraphics Ltd Chris Broughton Associates East Hants District Council John Slater Navigus Planning Nick Pincombe, Urban Edge Environmental Consulting Petersfield Town Council Snug Architects South Downs National Park Authority Steve Jacob, Petersfield Festivals Troy Hayes, Troy Planning + Design


Annex A – Viability Analysis The SDNPA viability study6 undertook a detailed assessment of residential property development in Petersfield in order to determine an appropriate level of Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). This analysis builds upon that study in order to demonstrate that the policies presented in the PNP do not result in development in Petersfield becoming unviable.

The Additional Cost of the PNP Policies The following table shows which policies could result in additional development costs (beyond the cost of affordable housing) and calculates how much this additional cost could be per m2 of floor area. Policy Cause of

additional cost Calculation of additional cost Additional

Cost per m2

for a typical (95m

2)

home

HP2 Building to the lifetime homes standard

The SDNPA viability study suggests a figure between £545 and £1,615 per dwelling. We have therefore taken a figure of £1,000 for an average (95m

2) home.

10.5

HP8 (now deleted)

Minimum size of dwellings

As viability is based on values of properties per m2, larger

dwellings will have no impact on viability – larger properties sell for more. The size of dwellings assumed in the SDNPA viability study is approximately the same as the size requirements in HP8 – so there should be no additional cost.

0

HP9 (now HP8)

Minimum parking spaces

This policy conforms to existing EHDC/HCC policy and is therefore unlikely to result in any additional cost over that already being incurred.

0

HP9 (now HP8)

Building to the standards required by Building for Life

The BfL standards are mostly about good design and most of the considerations need not cost any more. Furthermore, a number of the considerations (such as design quality) are included in BEP1 and therefore costed there. Nevertheless, we think it is reasonable to allow an additional 1% increase in build costs for this item.

1

10

BEP1 Enhanced design quality and build quality

We think it is reasonable to assume a 3% premium on a base build cost .

1 This would result in an additional spend of £2850

for an average home.

30

BEP5 Cost of achieving neutral impact on surface water run-off – i.e. implementing SUDS

Evidence from 2011 government consultation was that SUDS is normally more cost effective that traditional drainage systems.

2

0

Total additional cost of implementing PNP Policies per m2 of build £50.50

Notes: 1. Additional build costs calculated using a base build cost of £1,057 per m

2 (build cost taken from SDNPA viability

study, appendix 1, table 1) 2. See Annex 1 to Annex F of DEFRA's Consultation on Sustainable Drainage Systems, Dec 2011

6 SDNPA, Viability Assessment: Community Infrastructure Levy and Affordable Housing (Ref: DSP13197), Final

Report, Jan 14


The Viability of Development in Petersfield The SDNPA Viability study found that properties in Petersfield, January 2014, were selling for somewhere between £3,500 and £4,500 per m2. Based on this range, it suggested a CIL for Petersfield of £150m2. The analysis suggested that a development was viable if the residual value of the land (after subtracting the cost of development) was above £850,000 per hectare, but ideally above £1,500,000 per hectare. The table below shows the residual land values for each of the scenarios in the viability study for:

a) property selling at £3,500 per m2 with a CIL of £150 per m2 (i.e. the lower limit of selling price and the proposed CIL)

b) property selling at £4,000 per m2 with a CIL of £200 per m2 (i.e. the middle of the range with an increased CIL)

The table shows that all the scenarios are viable for (a) which is as expected as this is the recommended CIL from the report. However, the table also shows that all scenarios are valid for (b) i.e. if property prices increased by 14% then all the scenarios would still be viable with an increased CIL of £200 per m2.

No. Scenario Amount of Affordable Housing (in accordance with PNP policy HP5)

(a) Residual Land Value of development at £3,500 per m2 with a CIL of £150 per m2

(b) Residual Land Value of development at £4,000 per m2 with a CIL of £200 per m2

1 1 x 4 bed house 10% 2,850,439 3,893,031

2 2 x 4 bed houses 10% 2,850,439 3,285,353

3 5 x 3 bed houses 20% 1,788,475 2,471,094

4 10 houses (mixed 2, 3 & 4 bed)

40% 1,768,089 2,464,479

5 10 flats, mixed 40% 1,327,843 2,157,578

6 15 dwellings, mixed 40% 1,550,665 2,216,581

7 30 dwellings, mixed 40% 1,500,204 2,230,326

8 100 dwellings, mixed 40% 1,376,183 1,860,701

9 250 dwellings, mixed 40% 1,374,710 1,858,579

Notes:

1. All figures taken from SDNPA Viability Study, appendix II. 2. Sheltered flats scenario not included as it assumes an initial value of £4,000 per m2. 3. Enhanced build cost examples not included – but all result in a similar pattern i.e. if the

development is viable at £150 per m2 CIL and a value of £3,500 per m2 then it is at least as viable at a CIL of £200 per m2 and a value of £4,000 per m2.


Conclusion The property values established by the SDNPA viability report were researched between August and October 2013 (see appendix III). As the report itself points out, it was compiled at a time when the economy was emerging from recession (para 2.4.8) and there have therefore been significant house price rises since then. In fact, the Office of National Statistics Statistical Bulletin on the UK House Price Index, July 2014 showed that house prices in the South East had increased by 12.2% from the previous year. It is therefore reasonable to assume that by the time the PNP and the SDNPA CIL charging schedule come into force, house prices in Petersfield will have increased by at least 14% over the values detailed in the viability report. Thus, with a new lower limit value of £4,000 rather than £3,500 the table above shows that a CIL of £200 per m2 would be viable. The SDNPA consultation process has indicated that the level of CIL for Petersfield will be £150 per m2 when it is introduced and thus this analysis shows that there is therefore spare capacity for another £50 per m2 within the schedule which is sufficient to accommodate the additional costs arising from the PNP policies.

Draft Policies which are not viable The consultation draft plan included another policy (Policy H6) which stated that 10% of market properties must be marketed at 90% of the market value. If the market value is £4000 per m2, then 10% of this is £400. If this was marketed at 90% of the market value, this would be £360, which is a £40 per m2 loss for the developer. Thus, for this policy to be viable there would need to be another £40 per m2 margin in the CIL viability calculations.


0"

0.2"

0.4"

0.6"

0.8"

1"

1.2"

1.4"

1.6"

1.8"

1"

7"

13"

19"

25"

31"

37"

43"

49"

55"

61"

67"

73"

79"

85"

91"

97"

Petersfield"

South"East"

England"

Annex B – Housing Mix Analysis

Introduction and Aim

This section builds upon the Petersfield housing needs studies undertaken by Navigus Planning7 and Chris Broughton Associates (CBA)8. It draws together findings from both reports, together with other demographic data to derive a target housing mix for Petersfield for the first five years of the Neighbourhood Plan. Both the Navigus and CBA reports are published as part of the set of supporting documents for the Neighbourhood Plan. It should be noted that this section looks only at the target mix for market housing, as the housing mix for affordable housing will be determined by the housing authority on a case-by-case basis.

The Missing Generation Both the Navigus and CBA reports highlighted the ‘Fleeing the Nest’ group of people. These are young people, from Petersfield, who cannot afford to buy property in the town. This phenomenon is illustrated below:

Figure 18 - Petersfield's age distribution compared with England and the South East

Source: Office for National Statistics, Census 2011, Neighbourhood Statistics

The graph shows that Petersfield has significantly fewer people aged 19 to 35 than the average for both the South East and England. Whilst a dip between 18 and 22 might be expected as children leave home to undertake further education, the continued delta between the ages 22 and mid 30s confirms that Petersfield is missing a generation.

The Demand

The numbers that support Figure 18 show that if Petersfield were to match the England average for people between 22 and 32, there would be an additional 625 people living in the town.

7 Petersfield Housing Study, Navigus Planning, dated Sep 13.

8 CBA Detailed Housing Requirement, dated 19 Oct 2013.

%age of the population

Age


The CBA report9 outlined a potential growth in households of between 134 and 1384. If we assume a growth towards the upper end of this range, at around 1000, given that there are currently 6500 households in the town, this equates to a growth of 15%. Thus, if we extrapolate the shortage of 625 people over the lifetime of the plan, it becomes 718 people or, at 2.3 people per household, 312 dwellings.

The lack of suitable housing is clearly not the only reason that young people choose not to live in Petersfield, lack of job opportunities and perhaps the draw of London also play a part. However, whilst we can work on creating better employment opportunities, if we do not provide suitable homes, then young people will continue to leave the town. We can therefore conclude that we would need to provide around 312 dwellings in order to recover the lost generation.

The Mix

Clearly the 22 to 32 age group will form the majority of first time buyers and will therefore span the 1 to 3 bed requirement. In terms of affordability, it will be the 1 or 2 bed properties that this group is more likely to be able to afford. Both the Navigus and CBA reports identified that demand for 1 and 2 bed units was strong. It is therefore proposed that 20% of this type of demand is met by one bed properties, 50% by two bed properties with the remaining 30% being three bed. For the 312 dwellings outlined above, this equates to 62 one bed units, 156 two bed units and 94 three bed units.

The Retiring Downsizers

The Demand

This group was clearly identified in the Navigus report10 and is particularly relevant to Petersfield as it supports many of the outlying villages whose ageing populations may wish to move into the town. The CBA report identified an increase of 1,551 over 60s over the lifetime of the plan.11 If we assume that the size of the average over 60s household is less than the 2.3 national average, say 1.8, then this results in an increase in over 60s households of 861. Some of these will be part of the overall 15% increase, so the net increase in over 60s households would be lower at 749. Many of these households will choose not to downsize, or will be in homes that are already suitable for their needs, so perhaps only 50% will require downsizing properties. This gives a figure of 374 households.

The Mix

Again, the Navigus report clearly identified that this group will primarily want two and three bedroom properties – but of good quality, appropriately sized and suitable for people with limited mobility. Feedback from the community events indicated that three bedrooms would be the preference. It is therefore proposed, that for this group, the target housing mix would be 25% two bedroom and 75% three bedroom.

9 CBA Detailed Housing Requirement, para 28

10 Petersfield Housing Study, Navigus Planning, para 3.24

11 CBA Detailed Housing Requirement, para 29


The Growing Families

The Demand

The third group identified by both CBA and Navigus were families who needed to make the leap from three to four bedroom homes.

In 2011 there were 1,245 families with 1 or more children under the age of 11 living in Petersfield.12 Again, if we assume a growth of 15%, then this will result in 1,432 households by the end of the lifetime of the plan. If we assume that some of these households will choose not to upsize and that others may already be in suitable homes then perhaps 60% of these families will need larger accommodation. This equates to 859 homes. Some of this requirement will be met by the retiring downsizers vacating larger properties, and some of it by normal housing market movements. Of the 374 downsizers, we could assume that 60% of their properties will go to growing families and that another 100 larger homes would become available through normal market activity. This leaves a net unmet demand of 535 homes. The Mix

In the main, growing families will require four bed homes, with a small proportion requiring 5 bed homes.

Summary of Market Demand The analysis above has shown the following levels of demand:

Category Demand over the lifetime of the plan

Mix No. of dwellings of particular size

The Lost Generation 312 dwellings 20% 1 bed, 50% 2 bed, 30% 3 bed

64 1 bed 156 2 bed 94 3 bed

The Retiring Downsizers 374 dwellings 25% 2 bed, 75% 3 bed

94 2 bed 280 3 bed

The Growing Families 535 dwellings 95% 4 bed, 5% > 4 bed

508 4 bed 27 > 4 bed

Table 12 - Summary of Market Demand Analysis

The total number of dwellings required adds up to 1,221 which is clearly far more market housing than the plan can deliver. However, we can use this analysis to calculate the mix of homes that might be required as a percentage of the overall requirement. This results in the following:

Dwelling Type %age of total %age of the total of this type of property that

should be suitable for older residents

One Bed 5%

Two Bed 20% 35%

Three Bed 31% 75%

Four Bed 42%

More than Four Bed 2%

Table 13 - Proposed breakdown by dwelling type

12

Office for National Statistics, Census 2011, Neighbourhood Statistics


Conclusions This analysis provides a clear methodology for deriving a target housing mix for Petersfield. CBA’s recommendation that this analysis is repeated after five years is supported as much can change over that period. Whilst the analysis has derived specific figures, it is proposed that the associated housing mix policy allows some latitude and variation across developments, with the overall intent of curbing development which is completely at odds with the target mix.


Annex C – Self and Custom Build

Introduction and Aim This section provides an overview of how the self-build sites might be developed during the lifetime of the plan. It does this by presenting evidence of both demand and deliverability for self-build housing in Petersfield. Sites H2 and H11 have been allocated for self-build within the plan.

What is self-build?

For many people, the phrase ‘self-build’ suggests a process where bricks and mortar are laid by the future occupier. Whilst this is a route that some people take, there are many other, less stressful, ways of building your own home. You could employ a builder to construct the watertight shell of the building and then sub-contractors to complete the internal services and finishes. Alternatively, you could employ a main contractor to carry out the entire build. There are also companies specializing in custom-built homes where you simply tell them which of their designs you like, what finishes you want and they do the rest. Thus the phrase ‘self and custom build’ which aims to encompass all these construction models.

Does the self and custom build model work?

A recent survey by the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) showed that 75% of people would not wish to buy a home from a volume housebuilder13. However, many of those people simply don’t have the choice to buy any other type of home at an affordable price.

Government figures suggest that one in two people in the UK would like to build their own home if they had the chance14. However, only 8% of our homes are constructed in this way – mostly because people cannot find suitable (or affordable) land. In contrast, much of Europe uses this model with over 80% of homes in Austria being custom built15.

Figure 19 - Percentage of homes constructed via self or custom build methods Source: NaSBA Local Authorities Guide, Feb 2014

13

NaSBA Local Authorities Guide, Feb 2013. Page 3. 14

Laying the Foundations: A Housing Strategy for England, Nov 2011. Paragraph 68. 15

NaSBA Local Authorities Guide, Feb 2013. Page 2.


This area has attracted significant government attention over the past two years as it is seen as a model which could provide a sizeable boost to house-building in the UK. The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) encourages local authorities to assess the demand for self-build plots and then provide an appropriate supply16. The National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG) goes further, pointing out that there is evidence of significant demand for this type of housing and suggesting that local demand can be assessed by: building plot search websites, surveys and registers of interest17. There is also a £30m fund to encourage and support self-build projects18.

These policy changes and incentives are now beginning to result in changes in the UK with some local authorities and neighbourhood plans beginning to include designated self-build areas or policies19. Furthermore, in order to meet this emerging demand, a number of specialist developers are emerging to provide high-quality bespoke housing.

The National Self-build Association (NaSBA) has set up the Self-build Portal in conjunction with the government to provide advice and guidance to individuals and organisations interested in either being part of, or supporting, this developing area.

Why self or custom build?

The self or custom build model offers a number of advantages for individuals, local authorities and communities. In general, self or custom built homes will …

… typically cost less than buying the market equivalent as the costs do not include the developer’s marketing costs and profit – thus these homes will be more affordable

… be of a higher quality in terms of both architecture and construction than most modern homes

… lead to a more diverse and rich mix of architecture

… tend to include more sustainable and green technologies

… stimulate the local economy by employing local trades-people

… create stronger and more cohesive neighbourhoods as self-builders generally become key members of their local communities

Affordable Homes for Local People

A strong theme that emerged during the plan’s community consultation events was about ensuring local people could afford homes in their own town. Whilst the plan’s affordable housing and local need policies will contribute towards this, it was also felt that self-build plots should be reserved for local people. This provides another mechanism for people who live in the area, or who have a local connection, to be able to continue to be a part of their community.

Self-build costs can be as low as £1100 per square metre, which would see a starter home of around 80m2 costing £88,000 to build. Add on the cost of the plot – which, if administered by a Community Land Trust (see paragraph 0 below) could be less than £100,000, and it is clear that self-build homes would be significantly more affordable than conventional developer-built homes.

Our definition of a local connection is by no means onerous as we expect to welcome newcomers to our town in future years. For example, people who have lived or worked in the town for a year or more will then qualify as having a local connection.

The plan’s self and custom build policy therefore restricts individual plots within the self-build sites to people with a local connection and does so in perpetuity.

16

NPPF paragraphs 50 and 159. 17

NPPG paragraph 021. 18

See http://www.homesandcommunities.co.uk/ourwork/custom-build 19

A good example is the recently approved Teignbridge Local Plan which specifies that 5% of all new development should be self or custom built.


The Demand

We believe that there is strong demand for self or custom built homes in Petersfield. The two sites we have allocated are expected to yield in the region of 112 dwellings. In order to show that this is a suitable allocation for the next 15 years, in accordance with NPPG guidance, we have assessed demand in a number of ways.

The Self-build Register

We have set up a register on our website which allows people to express an interest in self-build. As of Jun 14, this register has attracted over 40 individuals, many of whom are keen to start building with finance already in place. Considering that this register has been given very limited publicity, we believe that there are more people within Petersfield who would wish to self-build who we have not yet reached. National Survey Data

The National Self-build Association has, over the past two years, commissioned an Ipsos Mori survey across the UK. The 2014 survey revealed that 14% of people intended to actively research how to build a home for themselves in the next 12 months. It also showed that 2% of these people expect to move beyond research and take action within the next 12 months to buy a plot, submit a planning application or start construction work20.

Petersfield has 6,500 households. If 2% of these households intend to take action within the next 12 months, that would be 130 people looking for self-build plots in just the first year of the plan. Plot Finding Websites

There are a number of subscription websites which offer individuals details of potential self-build plots as they come onto the market. We contacted the plot-finder service (www.plotfinder.net) and asked them about the number of paying customers who were currently registered in Petersfield or surrounding areas.

Their reply indicated that there are currently 60 individuals actively searching for self-build plots in the GU31, 32 and 33 postcode areas.

Delivery Models

Allocating this number of self and custom build plots in a Neighbourhood Plan is new and different. It therefore results in some trepidation from landowners, developers and planners as it cannot be delivered using a conventional development model. However, this does not mean that it cannot be delivered. There are a number of mechanisms and precedents that illustrate how these sites could be successfully brought forward: Custom Build Developers Whilst the self-build allocation prevents an individual developer from building-out an entire site, our policy does permit a developer to put in place the supporting infrastructure and services before selling off individual plots. In most cases, the developer will also offer a range of their own house designs which they could then build for the purchaser. This is, in many ways, an attractive business model for the developer as (a) they get their return on the initial investment quite quickly once the plots are sold and (b) their subsequent construction activities are then not speculative and thus are a more secure income stream.

20

http://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/3347/One-in-seven-Britons-expect-to-look-into-building-their-own-home.aspx


There are a number of developers who are now actively subscribing to this model. The two largest are Igloo and HAB Housing. We have been in discussion with HAB and they have indicated that they would be very interested in becoming involved with custom build in Petersfield. Examples of other self or custom build schemes which are being delivered by a co-ordinating developer include: Bickleigh Eco Village, Devon. A developed of 91 custom build homes by Cornerstone ZED with a single contractor putting in all the supporting infrastructure. (http://www.selfbuildportal.org.uk/bickleigh) Hempsted Green, Peterborough. A development of 10 homes with a village green and children’s play area, with streets and infrastructure being provided by the developer. (http://www.selfbuildportal.org.uk/hempsted-green-peterborough) Community Land Trusts A number of other self-build schemes have been delivered using Community Land Trusts (CLTs). This model sees a CLT buy the land and then co-ordinate the installation of supporting infrastructure. Individual plots can then be sold off to individuals, or perhaps leased in order to reduce the land acquisition costs for local people. This model is therefore attractive for delivering affordable self-build dwellings. Examples of self-build schemes delivered by CLTs include: Devon Community Eco Homes. An initiative between the Land Society and six parish councils in Devon to provide affordable self-build homes for local people. (http://www.selfbuildportal.org.uk/community-eco-homes-devon) Cornwall Community Land Trust. The Cornwall Community Land Trust has delivered or enabled over 120 affordable homes for local people. (http://www.cornwallclt.org/) Self-build Groups - Cohousing The third potential method of delivery is for a group of individuals to come together and build a collection of homes. In parts of Europe, this can be quite common with 30 or 40 individuals forming their own collective company. A group this size is then able to raise finance and co-ordinate the installation of supporting infrastructure. Examples of this type of scheme include: LILAC (Low Impact Living Affordable Community) in Leeds. This pioneering and award winning project delivered affordable, low energy and sustainable housing for 20 households. (http://www.lilac.coop/) Laughton Community Project. A development of 21 homes for 35 adults and 36 children in East Sussex. (http://www.cohousing.org.uk/community-project-laughton) Berlin Building Groups. One in ten of all new homes constructed in Berlin are now delivered using this mechanism. (http://www.selfbuildportal.org.uk/berlin-building-groups)

http://www.selfbuildportal.org.uk/bickleigh

http://www.selfbuildportal.org.uk/hempsted-green-peterborough

http://www.selfbuildportal.org.uk/community-eco-homes-devon

http://www.cornwallclt.org/

http://www.lilac.coop/

http://www.cohousing.org.uk/community-project-laughton

http://www.selfbuildportal.org.uk/berlin-building-groups


Conclusions

We believe that the self or custom build model is a valid housing model for the UK, if appropriate land can be allocated. This is a construction method which has been proven in many other countries and, as a result of government policies and incentives is now growing in popularity in this country.

In Petersfield, we believe that the demand for this type of housing is strong, and is likely to become even more popular as the model is proven to deliver. In the first year of the plan, we believe that somewhere between 40 and 130 people will be looking to build their own home in the town.

An allocation of 112 dwellings would therefore appear to be proportionate within the overall 15 year lifetime of the plan.

In terms of deliverability, custom build developers, Community Land Trusts and cohousing projects all offer the potential to deliver a range of high quality affordable homes on the sites we have allocated. All these mechanisms have delivered homes in the UK over the past few years. Whilst the plan can not prescribe exactly how the self-build sites will be delivered, we believe that a combination of these three mechanisms would spread the risks and also result in a rich mix of housing and community groups within these new areas.

Further Information Government view on custom build and the custom build fund: http://www.homesandcommunities.co.uk/ourwork/custom-build The National Self-build Association: http://www.nasba.org.uk/ The Self-build Portal: http://www.selfbuildportal.org.uk/ Community Land Trusts: http://www.communitylandtrusts.org.uk/home Co-housing in the UK: http://www.cohousing.org.uk/

http://www.homesandcommunities.co.uk/ourwork/custom-build

http://www.nasba.org.uk/

http://www.selfbuildportal.org.uk/

http://www.communitylandtrusts.org.uk/home

http://www.cohousing.org.uk/


Annex D – Aspirational Policies

Policy GAP2 conforms to: Hampshire County Council (HCC) East Hampshire District Transport Statement 2012, policy objectives 1(iv) and D12. NPPF paragraphs 30 and 40


Improve the town pedestrian and cycle network

Proposals will be encouraged that establish a programme of works to provide a pedestrian and cycling conducive network to improve walking and cycling connectivity throughout the town. This will include

• Road junctions should be improved to provide suitable crossing points to improve pedestrian and cycle safety

• Where it is not possible to provide off road cycling on key routes to the town centre and schools, roads shall, wherever possible, provide advisory 1.5m cycle lanes alongside street design speed measures

• Creation of new east–west and north–south pedestrian and cycle routes as shown in Figure 9

- Land within the existing former Petersfield to Midhurst railway route as shown on the Proposals Map shall be safeguarded from any development in order to allow the provision of cycling and walking paths on this route

- A new north to south pedestrian and cycle route through the green corridors using the existing footpaths from the Hangers to the South Downs Way. The route will be required to address traffic and pedestrian crossing issues at the College Street / Ramshill junction and at the junction of Sussex Road and Dragon Street. A feasibility study to assess terrain and funding should be undertaken

Development which would prejudice the implementation of these improvements will not be permitted.

A more detailed list of improvements is shown in Figure 9 and in Table 10.


Policy GAP 3 conforms to: Hampshire County Council (HCC) East Hampshire District Transport Statement 2012 policy objectives 4 (vi & vii), D9 and B1. NPPF paragraphs 30 and 40


Making our streets safer

In the interests of street safety and to encourage both pedestrian and cycle access, work will be required to provide street design measures to sufficiently slow the traffic speed:

Where new development will increase traffic on existing residential roads and in the vicinity of schools,

and/or where traffic speed and its nature is already identified as an issue affecting safe pedestrian movement or where this will be compounded, such as to deter or impair people movement.

Problem areas or points (hot spots) are already identified as targets, including those with impairment of or poor crossing issues and excessive traffic speed or traffic are shown in Table 2 and include Pulens Lane / Durford Road, Bell Hill / Winchester Road, Swan Street, Tilmore Road junction.

Wherever possible, measures to improve the safety of routes from home to school and to the towns business areas e.g. in Frenchmans Road will be prioritised. This will include traffic calming and speed reduction measures possibly including shared space techniques to encourage streets to be conducive to walking and cycling. This should include the further provision of bus services where viable.

Work and liaison with SDNPA and HCC will be undertaken in order to protect residential areas from inappropriate HGV through traffic and excessive vehicle speed in order to help improve local air quality and achieve carbon reduction targets. This will be achieved where appropriate, by encouraging smarter transport choices, traffic measures and street lighting design.


Policy GAP4 conforms to: Hampshire County Council (HCC) East Hampshire District Transport Statement 2012, policy objectives 2 (vii), D9 and D12


Create a Shared Space and/or pedestrian/cycle priority friendly street design for the Town Centre Spine including the Market Square

Proposals for the creation of a ‘shared space’ street design for the east–west ‘Town Spine’ of the High Street, the Square, Chapel Street and Lavant Street from the War Memorial and Dragon Street junction to the town station forecourt as shown in detail in section 11.5.1 will be produced and implemented.

The intention is to provide a shared space design for Lavant Street that incorporates street furniture, trees, planting boxes, cycle racks and one very wide central crossing point for access into the Swan Street car park. Car parking areas will be created but the aim is also to retain or increase the amount of parking but provide it on two sides of the street. The ambient design speed will be slowed to allow for ease of cycling and pedestrian crossing. There will be a level surface over much of the street where possible and access for disabled people will be maximised. The scheme will extend to the Station forecourt.

An enlarged, mostly car free ‘active’ town Square and, a pedestrian priority High Street will be created through street design measures. (In particular adopting a slow speed shared space, where pedestrian movement is prioritized). The Square will extend to the High Street north side, as a level surface. More car parking shall be provided for blue badge holders. Access by vehicles is to be limited.

High Street. The shared space concept will extend to the High Street using street design measures including the siting of street furniture to limit vehicles. Car parking bay areas and service areas will be provided plus cycle parking, and will be clearly designated. Pedestrian movement will be priority throughout the Spine area.

Chapel Street will form part of the Scheme but will include parking areas – a large crossing area at the junction of Lavant Street is to be included.

Liaison and work with HCC and SDNPA and the District Council will be required. Contributions will be required from new developments in the town centre by section 106 agreement or via the Community Infrastructure Levy.


Policy GAP7 conforms to: Hampshire County Council (HCC) East Hampshire District Transport Statement 2012, policy objective B2

Policy GAP8 conforms to: Hampshire County Council (HCC) East Hampshire District Transport Statement 2012, policy objectives 2. JCS policy CP25. HCC Local Transport Plan 2011, section 8.25


Improve parking signage and designation/delineation and increase parking control zone

In order to provide greater clarity to car parking within the town and in response to comments and concerns of misunderstanding, clear signage and better delineation of bays is required together with consistent operation. Car parking control zone signs are to be located at key entrances to the town particularly into the Town Spine.

Clear well designed signs will also be required to divert incoming traffic to the car parks acting as interceptors.

It is also proposed that the existing town centre on street Car Parking Control Zone is extended to include Dragon Street, Lavant Street, Chapel Street south, Sheep Street, St Peters Road, Swan Street. The creation of a shared space scheme for the spine will be consistent with this Zone. The two are necessary to ensure success of a shared space scheme.

Further blue badge holder spaces are proposed for the east side of the Square together with some in Chapel Street and within car parks. Additional locations will be considered during the plan period.


Work with others to provide parking management that responds to users needs

Work with EHDC, Network Rail and others will be undertaken to seek to provide car parking management that aids a more attractive town centre, can provide possible preferential parking rates for town-centre workers at the station or Tesco north car park.

The creation of residents parking zones will be encouraged in areas adjacent to the town centre and station.

More cycle parking to be provided in the town centre car parks and along the Town Spine.

The use of long and short stay car parking and commensurate charging will be explored with the Local Authorities for the interceptor car parks and central car park.

Any development proposals affecting parking must be coherent with this policy.


Policy GAP9 conforms to: Hampshire County Council (HCC) East Hampshire District Transport Statement 2012, policy objective C8

Policy BP4 conforms to: NPPF paragraphs 7,9,20 and 28. JCS Policy CP5 (Employment & Workforce skills)


Improve the provision of bus services and coordination of services

Work with the appropriate stakeholders to create a strategy to provide more public transport buses in order to service the SDNP anticipated visitor numbers and residents’ needs.

The strategy shall explore how the provision can be achieved and the possible contributions from development that may be needed to implement any proposals and create longer term viability. It will also explore the types of vehicles that might be best suited to a circuit of the town’s residential areas and are compatible with the anticipated shared space scheme.

A transport hub (see policy GAP4 above) will be the focal point for most town services and it is proposed to provide integrated local transport information at this point.

The addition of better public transport services to facilities outside the town will be explored with HCC the Passenger Transport Team (Authority) and the HCC / Quality Bus Partnership.


Promote and enhance workforce skills

Any employment land proposal which seeks to promote and enhance workforce skills to ensure that local people have access to skilled employment and training opportunities will be strongly supported. The Town Council will work in partnership with local authority, Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs), businesses and training providers to enable training and skills development. Local apprenticeship schemes will be strongly encouraged.



Policy TP3 conforms to: NPPF paragraphs 7,19,20,23 and 28. JCS Policy CP9 (Tourism)


The Market Square

The use of the Market Square for markets, festivals and the consumption of food and drink will be encouraged subject to appropriate licensing and access arrangements. New and innovative market stalls should be sought and the Farmers’ Market (currently on the first Sunday of the month) encouraged to be more frequent and expanded to adjoining streets.

Petersfield Town Council, East Hampshire District Council and Hampshire County Council will be expected to work collaboratively to maximise the benefits of the Market Square for the use of the community at all times.


Promoting the Town

Currently the Town Council, District Council and the SDNPA each have their own promotion departments that, for the most part, operate independently. Whilst it is expected that this modus operandi will continue it is considered vital that these three organisations work more closely with a more joined up approach. Each website should provide links to the others where appropriate and should be updated regularly providing information about events, accommodation, transport and any other information needed by visitors. It would be advantageous if one of the three could take the lead in this co-ordination and it is believed that the National Park Authority is best suited to do this.


Annex E – A3 Maps This section contains the following maps: Overall site allocation – this map shows the overall allocation of sites for housing, employment, community use and green space. Town centre opportunities – this map shows the more detailed town centre sites that have been allocated for residential or employment use. It is referenced by the Housing and Business policies in sections 3 and 8. Getting around – this map details the improvements which need to be made to our road and cycle networks and should be read in conjunction with section 5. Parking – this map summarises our strategy for parking and should also be read in conjunction with section 5. Town centre vision – this map shows a vision for the town centre. Areas of special housing character – this map shows areas of special character which are protected by policy BEP5.

Petersfield Neighbourhood Development Plan · 2019-02-07 · September 2015 1 Petersfield...

Documents

Transcript of Petersfield Neighbourhood Development Plan · 2019-02-07 · September 2015 1 Petersfield...